text:
Q: Setting custom page titles for every pages Currently my site title looks like:
<title>My Site Title</title>

The above code is added on 'header.php' file, so every pages has the same page title.
I need to set different titles for different pages.
for example,
<title>
 if 'contact.php' then title= 'Contact Us'
 else if 'faq.php' then title= 'FAQ'
 else if 'add.php' then title= 'Add'
 else title= 'My Site Title'
</title>

somebody please help me!!

A: I guess contact.php include 'header.php';. Then something like this would work:
contact.php:
<?php
$title = 'Contact Us';
include 'header.php';
// your code
?>

header.php:
<?php
echo '<title>'.$title.'</title>';

Tip: have a look at template engines. I like smarty for example. Maybe someone will comment on this with some other examples ;)

A: I'd advice you to use an array with titles instead of a series of ifs (respectively a switch)
<?php

$file = basename($_SERVER['PHP_SELF']);
$titles = array(
    'contact.php' => 'Contact Us',
    'faq.php' => 'FAQ',
    'add.php' => 'Add',
);

if(array_key_exists($file, $titles){
    echo '<title>'.$titles[$file].'</title>';
}else{
    echo '<title>Ny Site Title</title>';
}

?>

A: Make a variable in your script called $page and use that variable in the template file.
Business logic for page Home, for example:
<?php
.
.
.
$page = 'Home';
render($page);

View logic page for Home:
.
.
.
<title>
<?php echo $page; ?>
</title>
.
.
.

This is just a concept, it is not a fully functional code.

A: Split your header in to 2 seperate php files, one before the title, and one after the title (this will work with other page specific data, see note at end of answer)
then the top of your pages should look like:
<?php include_once("inc/begin-head.inc");?>
<title>My Title</title>
<meta name="description" content="description"></meta>
<?php include_once("inc/end-head.inc");?>

There are some other solutions, such as make header a class and define variations to it, and then call a function to output the head completly
Please note, there are a LOT of other paged specific tags. Title, Meta Description, Canonical url link, meta keywords, open graph data .....

A: You can try like this and use basename($_SERVER['PHP_SELF']) and now lookup for the $title[key]
           $title = array();
           $title['home.php'] = 'My home page';
           $title['Hello.php'] = 'My title';

A: To add title dynamically , first set the following code in header.php file :
<title>
    <?php
        if(isset($title) && !empty($title)) {
            echo $title;
        } else {
            echo "Default title tag";
        }
    ?>
</title>

and set title in each page before including header as :
$title = "Your Title";
include 'header.php';

A: How I did this for anyone curious in the future...
I have a "pagetitles.php" page that contains this code:
 $page_files=array(
  "admin"=>"Admin Panel",
  "profile"=>"Your Profile",
  "billing"=>"Billing / Subscriptions",
  "pricing"=>"Our Pricing",
  "settings"=>"Your Settings",
  "bugs"=>"Bug/Feature Tracker",
  "search"=>"Search Results",
  "clients"=>"My Clients");

if(isset($_GET['rq'])){
if(in_array($_GET['rq'],array_keys($page_files))) {
$pagetitle = $page_files[$_GET['rq']];
}
}

Then I include that file at the very top of my index.php page, and echo $pagetitle where I want the title to be. BUT this also requires another file to handle serving the specific pages, using a ?rq request
In my "page_dir.php" file, I have the following that handles ?rq= pages (ex: www.example.com?rq=home will load the home page, with the above page title that's inside of "home" array)
Here's the page_dir.php file:
$page_files=array(
    "noaccess"=>"pages/noaccess.php",
    "home"=>"pages/dashboard/home.php",
    "lists"=>"pages/dashboard/lists.php"
  );

if(isset($_GET['rq'])){
if(in_array($_GET['rq'],array_keys($page_files))) {
      include $page_files[$_GET['rq']];
}else{
      include $page_files['home'];
}}else{
    include $page_files['home'];
}

This page_dir.php file, I put on the index page where I want main content to show up at... I then have each individual page with just the content (like home.php file is just home.php content without the navbar and footer)
On my index.php file, where I want the page title, I have this code:
    if(isset($code_nav_title)){
      echo $code_nav_title;
    }elseif(isset($pagetitle)){
      echo $pagetitle;
    }else{
      echo "Default Page Title Here";
    }

the $code_nav_title lets me set the page title from form submissions if I want it to say "success" or "failed" :) the "default page title here" lets you set something to automatically show up if everything fails to show (like if you forgot to set the page title)
Hopefully this makes sense! It's saved me sooo many headaches and makes it easy for expansion/changes!


text:
Ex-Navy captain lifts space legacy
By Ms Kari Hawkins ( Redstone)March 7, 2012
1 / 2 Show Caption + Hide Caption – Dr. Deborah Barnhart, a retired Navy captain who now leads the U.S. Space & Rocket Center, shares future plans for center exhibits showcasing advanced technologies in space and defense systems as well as a focus on energy technologies. (Photo Credit: U.S. Army) VIEW ORIGINAL
2 / 2 Show Caption + Hide Caption – The rocket park at the U.S. Space & Rocket Center is a testament to the Army's early years in rocket development. Since 1965, the space museum has showcased advancements in both space and defense hardware and technologies. (Photo Credit: U.S. Army) VIEW ORIGINAL
Her life may be firmly grounded on Earth, but Dr. Deborah Barnhart dreams of space travel, stars and planets, and the next space habitat.
What else could be on her mind when she has an up-close view of the space shuttle right outside her office window?
This retired Navy captain is "living outer space" these days as the chief executive officer and executive director of the U.S. Space & Rocket Center. But while visions of space dance in her head, Barnhart is focused on bringing the center back from the edge of financial ruin; working on an aggressive marketing and development campaign to increase the center's attendance numbers; developing new permanent space, military and energy exhibits; and building partnerships in the local defense and aerospace community.
"I am so thrilled to be here," she said on a recent afternoon as she looked through drawings for future center exhibits.
"Our job is to be a showcase of technology for NASA, the Army and the corporate aerospace world. Dr. Wernher von Braun (internationally recognized German rocket scientist who began the nation's space program at Redstone Arsenal and who worked to establish the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in 1965) said he wanted this museum to be a showcase for what is happening in Huntsville and that continues as my focus."
That focus is broad and inclusive of the science and technology research and development of space and military systems in Huntsville that have taken man to the moon, led the nation's military dominance and made the U.S. the world's technology leader. The rocket technology developed at Redstone Arsenal by von Braun and his team of German and American scientists is the basis for a museum collection that makes the U.S. Space & Rocket Center home to the world's largest collection of space artifacts. Currently, an exhibit titled "100 Years of Von Braun: His American Journey" is on display through May 15. And as the center prepares to celebrate von Braun's 100th birthday on March 23, Barnhart fully grasps the importance of her role in building on the center's legacy for the future.
"This center belongs to the state of Alabama and to the people of Alabama, and I am von Braun's handmaiden to continue the work," Barnhart said.
"Redstone Arsenal donated the land for the Space & Rocket Center. That donation made it possible for the state to build the museum that von Braun envisioned. He wanted this center to educate and to inspire interest in science and technology, and rockets. My favorite quote of his is 'All one can really leave one's children is what's inside their heads. Education, in other words, and not earthly possessions, is the ultimate legacy, the only thing that cannot be taken away.' The Space & Rocket Center is a place to inspire that legacy."
This is the fourth time Barnhart's career has brought her to the U.S. Space & Rocket Center. She came to Huntsville as a young girl when her father took a job at Marshall Space Flight Center. Barnhart attended elementary school just a quarter of a mile from the U.S. Space & Rocket Center, and graduated from Butler High School and the University of Alabama-Huntsville in 1973.
During her last year of college, Barnhart worked in public affairs and marketing at the U.S. Space & Rocket Center. A few years later, she was again on the center's staff, managing publicity for the newest addition to the center's museum -- the space shuttle.
"That's when I became interested in satellites. At that time, the Navy was in charge of all satellite programs. My father had been a Navy Seabee in World War II and my brother attended the Naval Academy. So, at the age of 27, I joined the Navy to work on satellites," Barnhart said.
She attended Officers Candidate School, graduating at the top of a class of about 500 and receiving the Navy's top assignment -- sea duty. Realizing the opportunity to be one of the first women to serve at sea, Barnhart shifted her interest in satellites to commanding ships.
"I was the seventh woman to be certified to fight on and drive Navy vessels," she said. "I drove ships on the west coast and the east coast. I loved the Navy, and the ability to see the world as a finite place. I've heard it said that everyone joins the military to get away from something, to 'get out of Dodge.' And maybe I did want to get out of Dodge, but I also joined the military to go toward something, to pursue an interest and an opportunity."
Though she was a member of a prestigious group of women who opened doors for women's equality in the military, she doesn't consider herself a trailblazer.
"When I think of a trailblazer, I think of all those nurses who served on the battlefield in World War I or World War II's Rosie the Riveters (American women who worked in the factories to produce munitions and war supplies). I think of Rear Admiral Grace Hopper, whose work led to the development of the first modern computer program languages," she said.
"There are trailblazers who have come before all of us. But, for me, the Navy wasn't about trailblazing. It was about the experience of a lifetime."
The Navy taught her that "time is a precious resource." It taught her about the world and about technology. It taught her how to command, lead, persevere and overcome challenges.
"The Navy provided the broadest opportunities," she said. "I went around the world three or four times, and I came to understand the other two-thirds of the world, the waters that surround us. In the Navy, you can experience submarines, the amphibious and ground maneuvers of the Marine Corps, surface ships, Navy air and space aspects, Aegis (ballistic missile defense system) and missile defense. And the Navy still has a large role in space as well."
Barnhart said ship and submarine living mirrors living in space.
"Just like in a big space station, when you live at sea you are totally self-sustained," she said. "You have to take everything you need with you and you are working in a hostile environment. You are self-contained and disconnected from the rest of the world. It's the closest analogy to a lunar base that you can get on Earth."
During her 26-year military career, Barnhart also served as a Navy reservist. Along the way, she had two children, pursued a doctorate in education at Vanderbilt University and found her way back to the U.S. Space & Rocket Center for a third time. From 1986-90, Barnhart served as the director of Space Camp and Space Academy, working with the U.S. Space & Rocket Center's first director, Ed Buckbee. She also wrote curriculum for the center's Space Academy II, the teachers' program and the Aviation Challenge program.
She left the center to pursue a career in private industry, working as a vice president at Hamilton Sundstrand Space, Sea Systems International, and Honeywell Space and Defense.
"At Honeywell, I did become involved in classified satellite work that was largely associated with spacecraft," she said, finally realizing her earlier aspiration of a career in satellite technology.
After retiring, Barnhart lived in Florida, where she owned and managed two thoroughbred training centers and did management consulting until she was sought out by members of the Alabama Space Science Exhibit Commission to replace retiring U.S. Space & Rocket Center director Larry Capps. She became the center's fourth director in January 2011.
"When the board called me, my first reaction was they could get somebody better," she recalled. "But they kept calling me and then they finally told me the financial situation."
At the time, the center was $19 million in debt, much of which had overshadowed the center since 1998 when then director Mike Wing launched large-scale initiatives that were largely unfunded. The center's financial situation presented Barnhart with a challenge she couldn't ignore.
"There was nothing to lose. We were in extremis, and in the Navy that means we were about to hit something and that's not good," she said. "I said 'I'll fix it or I'll die trying.' This facility is worth spending my life to save."
She brought sweeping change to the U.S. Space & Rocket Center with three missions in mind -- to be a NASA showcase, to be a showcase of Army programs and defense technology, and to be a showcase for energy education and technologies. Besides getting the center's financial situation under control, she has also restructured the organization to consolidate positions, launched a new marketing program that includes heavy use of social media, began the development of new exhibits for the center that will also be leased as traveling exhibits, and began work on new features, such as a simulator for lunar, planetary and Mars missions, that will set the center's future path.
"My number one imperative since I've been here is for us to be self-sustaining and to get operational equilibrium that will help us reduce the debt," she said.
"In my first year here, we reduced the debt by $1 million. It's a start that puts us on the right path. And we are really improving and firing up our marketing, and re-knitting with the community and corporate world here as well as with international partners."
The results of Barnhart's dedication have come quickly for the $22 million-a-year-business that attracts more than 500,000 visitors each year. Besides reducing debt, attendance grew by about 13 percent in 2011 after 10 years of decline and is expected to grow another 10 percent this year. The center has been featured on four television shows and in the Hallmark movie "A Smile as Big as the Moon." The U.S. Space & Rocket Center is once again the state's top tourist attraction.
"In everything that we do, we want to inspire that next generation of explorers," Barnhart said.
The biggest challenge facing the center is to develop new exhibits that keep the science and technology, and the story of space "current, relevant and inspirational." The center is home to the largest collection of space artifacts in the world, including two Saturn 5s, the full space shuttle stack with the external tank and solid rocket booster and 13 aircraft.
"We want to be a regional and national science center, not just an artifact museum. We want to keep the exhibits fresh and keep the inspiration strong," Barnhart said. "Building on our robust artifact base, I want to create a science center like no other that stimulates scientific and technical education with hands-on exhibits that include NASA, the Army and companies located here."
The center's audiences are threefold -- the tourists who want to view the museum's artifacts and exhibits, the Space Camp and Aviation Challenge participants who want a full range of simulated space travel experiences, and the local community who want a reason -- new exhibits, events and social gatherings -- to revisit the center over and over again.
Toward that end, the center will open an Earth Day exhibit on April 20 that will include exhibits on everything from helio-physics to energy efficient cars. Later this year, the center will host the "Math Alive!" exhibit for school groups. And a master plan for the center's 432 acres includes an advanced technology and future war fighter permanent exhibit in the main building, as well as an expansion of its outdoor displays and exhibits.
"I want people who come here -- children and adults -- to discover this small planet and its relationship in the galaxy and the cosmos," Barnhart said. "I want to crack that cosmic egg so that visitors here realize how fragile this tiny, blue world is, and that we better take care of it and that we need to find other planets like it.
"I hope to influence future voters and keep the space legacy alive."
With 500,000 Space Camp alumni and many thousands of others who visit the U.S. Space & Rocket Center every year, there's no doubt that von Braun's dream for a space museum is still relevant while also evolving with space development. For Barnhart, she hopes to someday be her own space exhibit by actually flying into space on a commercial spacecraft.
"The fundamentals of space exploration don't change. Propulsion, communications and life support don't change. But how we go about exploring space does change," she said. "The space shuttle has graduated, and now we are working toward having a space launch system for deep space exploration. And we will have more commercialization of space. I fully expect that I will be able to fly into space around the Earth someday. I'm saving my money to pay for that trip."
Editor's note: The U.S. Space & Rocket Center will celebrate the 100th anniversary of Dr. Wernher von Braun's birthday March 23 with cocktails at 6 p.m. and dinner at 7 in the Davidson Center for Space Exploration. Dr. Margrit von Braun, von Braun's daughter and a college dean at the University of Idaho, will be the guest speaker. There will be German cuisine, and music and dancing. For reservations, call Jennifer Crozier at 430-6702 or email jennc@spacecamp.com.
January 17, 2020Tax center set to offer free preparation services
January 16, 2020Fixing the Training Modular Task Force: An approach to Logistical Information System challenges
January 16, 2020Best Warrior Competition data will advance Soldier Center research
January 15, 2020Modernization, readiness, focus of CCDC Aviation, Missile Center reorganization
January 15, 2020FLW tax center to open Jan. 27
January 14, 2020PBA's Jarrett offers M8E1 CBPS support during Army/Navy game
January 14, 2020SDDC renovates Surface Operations Center, improving operations
January 9, 2020WSMR Cold War Tour
January 9, 2020Tobyhanna modernizes Army command centers
January 8, 2020CG recognizes FLW's best career counselors at awards ceremony
January 7, 2020Single-elimination gaming tourney coming to Long Rec Center Jan. 11

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
2019-02-03
==========

  * Update CNAME
  * Merge branch 'master' of github.com:mmoehrlein/mmoehrlein.github.io
  * added CNAME file
  * Create CNAME
  * v2.0.0 basic setup with docsify
  * adding stuff
  * docsify init
  * reset

2018-05-23
==========

  * simplified

2016-09-08
==========

  * added favicon to root

2016-09-05
==========

  * favicon
    addad icons for favicon to the static/images/
    and added code to head of index

2016-08-26
==========

  * parallax

2016-08-25
==========

  * optical changes
    added grey and white areas
    changed headbanner font styles and height

2016-08-24
==========

  * compressed headbanner cover
  * changed headbanner img and text
  * Merge pull request [#2](https://github.com/mmoehrlein/mmoehrlein.github.io/issues/2) from mmoehrlein/test
    switched to sass
  * prepros config
  * umstellung auf sass initial commit
  * added header background, skills section and smooth scroll

2016-08-23
==========

  * Merge pull request [#1](https://github.com/mmoehrlein/mmoehrlein.github.io/issues/1) from mmoehrlein/test
    cut company bio out
  * cut company bio out
  * file structure change
  * Initial Commit
  * Initial commit

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


SA BEARFEST hits Pretoriain summer.
BEARFEST 2014 is coming to Pretoria. Hosted by the SA Bears, at the Funny Farm Lodge from 5 to 7 December. This non-profit community event celebrates all aspects of the gay Bear community but everyone's invited; muscle bears, cubs, otters, chubs and chasers will get together for a weekend of fun with like-minded people, both Bears and Bear lovers. In the tradition of international Bear festivals, BEARFEST is set to grow as South Africa's own flagship Bear event.
With the support of various sponsors, festival goers can look forward to more than just lazing around the pool and soaking up the African sun or roughing it on the quad bike trails. Manhunt.net has ensured that each person attending the event will receive the necessary gear to survive the weekend, including some exclusive BEARFEST merchandise.
The Big Braai Company will stoke the embers to precision in their range of braais and smokers while the Etc. Zone stage will ensure that the entertainment delights all pallets, from the live sounds of Ga-Gorib, an afro-fusion duo that will set the mood for Friday's meet and greet, to a line-up of DJs hitting the decks on the Saturday covering all genres from the funky 80's to the hottest club tracks of today. The weekend promises plenty more fun and games and the crowning of Mr BEARFEST 2014.
CANSA will supply protective lotion against the African sun and OUT.org will take care of the armorist wellbeing of the crowd. Cargo Kilts will have the official Pride and Bear Tartan on display while Trouble Adult store will spice things up a bit.
Tickets are limited and are priced from R425.00 per person for the full weekend which includes all meals from Friday evening to Sunday lunch. All you need to do is pack a cooler or refill and get some shooters at the Lapa.


Award-winning engineering design practice Eckersley O'Callaghan have signed up to CMAP's AEC Edition, a fully integrated project accounting solution for engineering firms.
With offices in London, Paris, New York, San Francisco and Shanghai, the key strategic aim behind the switch was to unify their project accounting activities across all of their global offices via a single platform.
CMAP has a global company mapping structure, which makes it easy for those at group level to dip in & out of activities across each office, whilst keeping these separate from employees at project level, so project workers can only view activities in their own office.
Eckersley O'Callaghan believe that CMAP will allow them to better manage projects and speed up their processes. We're very pleased to start working with such a revered firm.


You will be called by the car park 20-30 minutes prior to your arrival time to confirm your drop off time. If you do NOT receive a call, please call them on 0121 647 3683 or 07935 209 700 when you are 15-20 minutes away from the terminal.
On arriving at the airport, follow signs for Valet Parking. You need to enter the "Valet Parking" Carpark, which is located next to Car Park 3. Take a ticket from the barrier before entering the "Valet Parking" car park and hand this to your driver. Once you have entered the Valet Parking car park, proceed to park in bays 25, 26, 27, 39, 40, 41, or 42. Here you will be greeted by one of the chauffeurs at the prearranged meeting point, who will have all your booking details and will be wearing a black jacket with the Drivefly company logo on it.
Please call the car park on 0121 647 3683 or 07935 209 700 once you have collected all of your luggage. In case of any delays, please let them know.
A chauffeur will deliver your vehicle to the agreed pick up point at the airport at the same point where you dropped your vehicle.
If you're going to arrive outside the time arranged, please give the car park as much notice as possible.
Please be aware that due to time restrictions in the car park you must be at the collection point within 10 minutes of your call, or you may incur additional charges payable at the exit barrier. If you are returning earlier than the date or time you have provided, the car park must be informed 24 hours in advance to avoid any delay.
From time to time the meeting point may change at short notice. You will be informed when you call if this will affect you.
Vehicles are parked at a secure car park close to airport. It is manned with 24-hour security, regular patrols and a high perimeter fence.
Please not that parking is for cars only and cars must fit in to a standard sized parking space (2.4m wide x 4.8m long). Extra charges will apply for cars that do not fit in to a standard parking space and must be arranged with Drivefly prior to the drop off date. Very large vehicles and minibuses may be refused if prior arrangements are not made. Minibuses / vehicles with more than 8 passenger seats cannot be accepted for Meet & Greet services.
It's your responsibility to make sure that your vehicle has road tax, holds a valid MOT certificate and is roadworthy / legal. If your car isn't legal or safe to drive, Drivefly will not be able to drive it to the car park, and you will not be able to get a refund.
If you are returning ahead of schedule, please telephone Drivefly ASAP. They must have 24 hrs notice (or as much notice as possible) so that they can make sure the vehicle is ready and you are not kept waiting on your return. Refunds cannot be given for part used bookings.
Our average review score for Birmingham Drivefly Meet and Greet is 4 from 105 reviews.
Left my vehicle in the hands of Drivefly for a long weekend. Returned to find several areas of damage to the exterior of my vehicle, personal goods stolen (i-phone/car technical accessories) from inside my vehicle, along with my service history book and specialist wheel nuts gone. Apart from one scratch, they are avoiding all responsibility. Very upset & disappointed!
The collection and return of my car was a very good service, I would question why my car did 20 miles whilst I was away, why some loose change had been taken out of it and why it was filthy!!! This company need to explain to customers exactly where their vehicles will be sercurly parked, if secure at all!!!
AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE. Arrived back to Birmingham late evening . Had to find the person with my key as we stood outside vehicle several minutes waiting. As a normal person I don't usually carry a torch with me when I come back off holiday so was unable to see around vehicle properly as the valet parking is quite dark. When I eventually got the keys the bloke just disappeared , i went to my car and drove home. In the morning I noticed mud all over it and even inside car . I then found the scratches. Now , I have had this car 1 and a half months (immaculate) and I now have SCRATCHES, DEEP SCRATCHES on my boot which now have to be repaired. I contacted them and surprise surprise they hide behind their clauses of checking vehicle blah blah blah . Now, I've calmed down now so all I will say is if you want your car to come back looking like it's been used as a tractor and then taken onto a stock car racing circuit for that added dent and scratch look then these guys are for you but, if you're someone who likes the original look of your vehicle as it sits outside your house right now then I advise you to steer clear of this incompetent run cowboy company who will take your money and disrespect your vehicle knowing they would get away with it. PLEASE PLEASE STAY AWAY OR AT LEAST IF YOU USE THEM TAKE A HUGE TORCH WITH YOU.
This is the WORST experience I have EVER had of a meet and greet - DO NOT USE! We arrived back and were kept waiting - It was a cold night and we have 2 young kids. When the car turned up my electronic key was not working albeit it was fine when I left the week earlier. So I had to unlock the door using the key which set the alarm off. I said that this was working when I dropped it off and they said not their problem phone the number on the card which I did who when they finally answered said that I needed to speak to the driver who dropped my car off. They both batted me back from one to the other. I finally gave up wanting to get the kids home and when we out all the luggage in found my boot would not shut at all? Completely broken. My car was also filthy - this is appalling appalling. As I said I have used several companies - this company should not be allowed to operate!
No results found for Birmingham Drivefly Meet and Greet for your chosen dates.


Some weeks ago, I enjoyed a fantastic "WE Day" in London with my family and thousands of true everyday heroes. The goal of these events are "to empower a generation to shift the world from 'me' to 'we', from a focus on the individual to the power of community", through global platforms. This change of mindset is also needed in business, to boost collaboration as a tool not just for growth, but for creating a social, valuable impact.
We are living in a world where trends like digital and data processing have sped up change like never before. Consumer understanding and demands are forcing companies to be more real and committed to issues like ethics, sustainability, or transparency. This also allows for risk taking companies to look for new ways of fast innovation in a more connected, accelerated, and dynamic world – and it clearly contrasts with the way of how we have been producing food.
Food powder blends – sector which I know well and where I have been working throughout my career- have been operated in the same manner for the last fifty years: A few big branded corporations with big central food powder processing plants and internal formulation experts produce about 10% of the worlds food while thousands and thousands of SMEs and local/regional producers supported by many smaller technology providers produce the remaining 90%, supplying these products as "black box" formulations.
In a more connected and concerned world when it comes to transparency, this cannot continue that way. Simply, it is no longer sustainable nor effective. As I had the chance to discuss with Craig Kielburger, co-founder with Marc Kielburger of Free the children, after an impressive "WE Day", food powder blends have an strategic position in how to connect the supply and food chain, and address the challenge to ensure that nobody will go to bed with a hungry stomach as Ban-Ki-moon have stated in a recent speech about objectives to be fulfilled by UN before 2030.
In the change from a ME to a WE economy, "Black box" and hiding IP trough this system are words of the past in our companies. Collaboration and transparency along supply chains, on the contrary, are the shift to achieve the challenge laid down by Ban Ki Moon's to our industry.


I recently downloaded the latest version of Da Vince Resolve - 11 lite. However, when the application turns on, they show me this message "ATTENTION: The CUDA driver is not loaded. Please quit Resolve and ensure that the CUDA driver is installed." The application still opens up after the message, however once I click on anything within the da vinci interface, the application crashes.
what version of cuda are you running. I believe you need 6.something for resolve 11.
Hi, I am actually unsure of what CUDA driver is in the first place. Could you help me understand what this is and how to check which version i am running on currently ?
Read the configuration guide on the Blackmagic support site. CUDA is a graphics engine that accelerates performance based on nVidia GPUs. It is required if you are running a supported GPU of this type.
Thanks for that briefing. So, I went figured out the CUDA thing and downloaded the latest version of the driver from NVIDIA and Reslove seems to be working fine. However, even when I have no other activities ongoing on the computer, resolve shows me this message indicating that my GPU memory is full.
Depending on your graphics card, this message usually indicates that you have insufficient VRAM.
Hi... my resolve 11 lite is not showing "GPU processing mode" in preferences tab. It shows "For capture and playback use - None," "For resolve live use- None." There is ticked in "red rocket if available" and "gpu for redbayer."
Are you using the version from Mac App Store? That only supports OpenCL. Please download the version from Blackmagic website to get access to CUDA.
I am on PC, windows 7 pro.. Nvidia Gtx780 3gb, 32gb RAM, i7 4770 3.40 processor.
On Windows, CUDA is automatically used if you have a NVIDIA GPU.
What is your source footage? Please post details on your system specs.
Can you try doing a DNxHD to DNxHD render, and see what speeds you get?
My source footage is magic lantern RAW (1920 X 1080). I tried a trial roundtrip with some RAW footage in resolve 11, the speed is only 5-6fps even with dnxhd 36, while exporting proxies for premierepro editing. The footage was never viewed, just exported after importing.
I thought resolve did not load cuda and is why it's not showing the "GPU processing mode" in "Preferences" menu. I didn't know cuda will be automatically be used. But such slow speed, despite recognizing cuda?
From already used source RAW footage (used to render out to dnxhd yesterday) now when rendered again through fresh resolve project shows - speed 70-75 fps.
The problem is I am doing a roundtrip, I won't be viewing the footage, I will just create proxies and view in premiere. So the 'never-viewed' clips will take render speed to only 4-11 fps. Can i do something to enhance the speed? like, preserving a particular percentage of RAM or something to resolve?
Your bottleneck is your source drive. When the files are cached in RAM, the render is fast. Get a faster drive for your source!
Thanks brother. I use lots of footage: for independent filmmaking. Can you suggest me a faster drive?


The future of makeup is coming, and it looks great!
Scene From The Film "The Fifth Element" Featuring Super Model Milla Jovovich.
We live in a very tech savvy world, all of our daily functions are either influenced or supported by a form of smart technology. These advancements in technology will continue to enhance our daily tools and functions. So it is inevitable that the future of beauty will include the merging of makeup and nano technology.
The videos above feature developing concepts for "electronic makeup". These electronic makeup devices would eliminate the guesswork when applying makeup. This would allow makeup applications to be much easier, faster and more precise, which would enable you to achieve your desired result with more ease.
After watching the videos above leave me a comment below letting me know if you like this concept. Would you try electronic makeup?


Replacing the lightbulb involves opening up the machine. You will need to purchase a sewing machine bulb set, including the wire plug-in, to replace it.
Using scissors, clip the two zip ties securing the lightbulb wire.
Place the machine on its side, with access to the bottom.
Gently pull out the white wire connecting the bulb to the machine.
Move the wire out from under the plastic hook.
Using the flathead screwdriver, remove the 5mm Flathead screw holding on the lightbulb bracket.


text:
NM3698 : Abhainn Sgathaig
taken 10 years ago, 3 km from Harris, Highland, Great Britain
Abhainn Sgathaig
To be more accurate, this used to be Abhainn Sgathaig, which drained Loch Sgathaigh southwards into Abhainn Rangail in Glen Harris. The construction of a dam to raise the level of Loch Sgathaig so that it could be used to divert more water into the Kinloch River has left the former stream bed a series of pools with barely a trickle of water now flowing south. In the background are Askival (left) and Beinn nan Stac.
Water Diversions on the Isle of Rùm :: NM3699
In 1845 Lord Salisbury (father of the later Prime Minister) bought the island of Rùm from Maclean of Coll with the intention of running it as a sporting estate. He wished to improve the Kinloch River for use as a salmon angling river, and developed an ambitious plan to augment the flow of water in the Kinloch River by diverting the headwaters of the Kilmory River and the Abhainn Rangail.
In 1849 work began on a dam at the south end of Loch Sgathaig to raise its level enough to send the water northwards instead of through the original channel southwards into Abhainn Rangail and into the sea at Harris Bay. This dam, which survives, resulted in an increase in the area of the loch, which is now marked as Long Loch on the maps. A dam was also built at the north end of Long Loch, and a channel cut from this dam towards Kinloch Glen. This dam also failed.
The Kilmory River rose in the north-western part of the island and flowed north through Kilmory Glen to enter the sea at Kilmory. In 1852 work began on a dam high up, below the slopes of Minishal. From this dam a channel would take the water about 600 metres into Kinloch Glen. Work was completed in 1854, but not long after the resulting loch had filled up, the dam failed, resulting in a surge of floodwater down Kilmory Glen. This is the dam now marked on maps as Salisbury's Dam.
After this efforts began to revive the scheme to draw water from Long Loch, but in 1855 Lord Salisbury seems to have lost interest and abandoned the scheme.
After John Bullough bought the island in 1888, an aqueduct was cut from Long Loch to the head of Kinloch Glen, and this still carries water from Long Loch into the Kinloch River.
At some point during the engineering works the Abhainn Monadh Mhiltich seems to have been diverted from falling into the Kilmory River so that it now flows into Long Loch.
© Copyright Anne Burgess and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence.
Start a discussion on NM3698 Suggest an update to this image Contact the contributor
NM3698, 18 images (more nearby )
Anne Burgess (find more nearby)
Sunday, 22 April, 2012 (more nearby)
Uplands Rivers, Streams, Drainage Water resources Moorland
OSGB36: NM 3627 9804 [10m precision]
OSGB36: NM 3625 9809
South-southeast (about 157 degrees)
· Water Diversions on the Isle of Rùm
· Abhainn Sgathaig [3]
· Beinn Nan Stac [2]


I have recently discovered some great dim sum deals at Shun Feng Seafood Restaurant, located at Parker Place in Richmond. For $20, you get to pick any 3 dim sum dishes from their menu, and also get to choose one from Steamed Ribs on Rice or Salty Fish Meat Pie on Rice. As some of the dim sum dishes could be as much as $7.95, this is definitely a good deal for 2 people. And they also have a $30 deal as well, which includes any 5 dim sum dishes and a rice dish.
The dishes we picked this morning were all pretty nicely prepared. Shrimp Dumpling has a very thin and delicate skin, and their shrimp filling gives a perfect crunch. But I think the dumplings could have been seasoned a little bit more.
Special Rice Roll with Mushroom and Minced Pork was a hybrid of the Cantonese rice over the counter xanax alternative roll and Chiuchow style dumplings. The hint of cilantro bring out a unique flavour combination of shiitake, shrimp and minced pork.
Salty Fish and Meat Pie on Rice is a very common dish back home in Canton, but here they evaluate the dish admirably. The taste of salty fish was quite potent but the amount of it was perfect and not overpowering the whole dish.
Our last dish took a while to come out but it was worth the wait. Pan Fried Beef Buns is another hybrid dish of Shanghai style pan fried buns and Cantonese style beef meat balls, and the result was great.
You're welcome! Hope you find a great place for dim sum on Mother's Day!


As providers of hassle free web hosting, we remove the need to know about anything technical, replacing control panels with people who want to help.
We speak your language and pride ourselves on our customer service, meaning that if you call when you need us, we'll be there.
Our dedicated servers are ideal for start ups or growing small businesses, we've got the right infrastructure to help you reach your goals.
Your online success starts with your appearance. Protect your brand with the ideal domain.
We handle the entire migration from your existing host to ensure a worry-free transfer.
We are always here to help with email and telephone support on all web hosting packages.
One of the safest and most efficient data centres, providing top levels of data security.
1 Based on acceptable and appropriate usage.
2 Free domain for first year of qualifying plans. If you register a free domain and cancel your account, a non-refundable domain fee will be applied.
3 Billing cycle is annual, payment can be made either monthly or annually in advance.


text:
Witchcraft – Bonus Episode
The Trial of Catherine Hayes
(Wo)manslaughter
Episode 5: Felony Murder and Constructive Malice
This week's episode is a bonus episode on the history of witchcraft in English law. We give murder a rest in this episode and focus exclusively on the rise and fall of witchcraft in England in the 17th century instead. The episode starts by looking at King James I's weird personal relationship […]
Today's episode is on one of the best topics ever – the history of witchcraft! We start this episode by looking at the first famous witchcraft trial (and pamphlet) in England, the case of Mother Waterhouse. Mother Waterhouse's case gives us some clues as to why witches and witchcraft-accusers tended to be women. One reason […]
This week's episode focuses on the trial of Catherine Hayes, convicted of murdering her husband and executed for it in 1726. Catherine Hayes was accused, along with two men, of murdering her abusive husband. The facts are just as fascinating now as they were in 1726. Spoiler alert: we'll see a preserved (pickled?) head, […]
Today's episode looks at women in the history of murder. First, we'll see how the law of murder applied differently to women than it did to men. One big difference is the fact that women weren't eligible to plead benefit of clergy until 1691, which meant they were (essentially) unable to be convicted of […]
Today we take a whirlwind tour through the controversial topic of felony murder and constructive malice! In today's episode, we ask whether it is murder when someone kills someone else unintentionally but during the course of a serious crime (or a felony). Normally killing has to be intentional to qualify as murder – but […]
Episode 4: Unintentional Killing
Welcome to today's episode on unintentional killing! We all know (now) that if you kill someone intentionally, it's murder. But is it ever murder when someone kills someone else unintentionally? Today, we look at a whole range of unintentional killings and ask whether they're murder, manslaughter, or sheer accident. Is it murder if you mean […]
Bonus episode: Insults!
Today's bonus episode is on insults. It looks at which insults were considered to be the most provocative in the 17th century. We'll see that courts were willing to excuse men who flew into a homicidal rage upon having their noses tweaked, being jostled, having the wall taken from them, and being "filliped upon […]
Episode 3: Provocation
Today's episode features a considerable amount of spontaneous stabbing. We start off with the famous case of Watts v Brains (1600), where the court has to deal with two major problems. First, is it OK to kill someone just because they make "a wry face" at you? Second, how do we prove malice […]
HOMpodcast
August 7, 2022 historyofmurderpodcast_st5s3k Uncategorized 0 Comments
This week's episode is a bonus episode on the history of witchcraft in English law. We give murder a rest in this episode and focus exclusively on the rise and fall of witchcraft in England in the 17th century instead. The episode starts by looking at King James I's weird personal relationship with witch-hunting. We then see how his son, Charles I, was a bit skeptical about the whole thing, and how he fostered skepticism towards witch-hunting until his career was cut short (so to speak) and civil war broke out.
We then turn to the story of the so-called Witchfinder general, Matthew Hopkins, and his colleague, John Stearne, who were responsible for the executions of over one-hundred alleged witches during the English Civil War.
L0000812 Matthew Hopkins, Witch-finder..Credit: Wellcome Library, London. Wellcome Images.images@wellcome.ac.uk.http://wellcomeimages.org.
Finally, we'll see that after the war, judges began to reject the idea that witchcraft could be proved in court, and how witchcraft prosecutions died out before witchcraft beliefs did.
Don't worry if you are missing the history of homicide – we'll be back with an episode on infanticide next time.
November 24, 2021 historyofmurderpodcast_st5s3k Uncategorized 0 Comments
Today's episode is on one of the best topics ever – the history of witchcraft!
We start this episode by looking at the first famous witchcraft trial (and pamphlet) in England, the case of Mother Waterhouse. Mother Waterhouse's case gives us some clues as to why witches and witchcraft-accusers tended to be women. One reason is that witchcraft cases tended to revolve around neighborly disputes, household problems and children. Because of this, we'll see the witch portrayed as the "anti-housewife" and the "anti-mother."
Then, we'll look at how witchcraft was prosecuted in the courts. How can you prove that someone is a witch? Many types of evidence are brought before the courts, including children having fits, some extremely doubtful testimony, and the witch's mark. Over time, the evidence becomes too doutbful to trust and witchcraft becomes impossible to prove by the late-seventeenth century.
Finally, we'll bring it all back to the history of murder. How does witchcraft match up against other "feminine" crimes we've seen so far?
And yes, it's true that witchcraft isn't classically considered a type of homicide. But how could I resist?
The Mother Waterhouse Pamphlet, depicting Satan as a dog with an ape face, horns, and a whistle around his neck.
The pamphlet's full name is The examination and confession of certaine wytches at chensforde in the countie of essex : Before the quenes maiesties judges, the xxvi daye of july, anno 1566, at the assise holden there as then, and one of them put to death for the same offence, as their examination declareth more at large, printed 1566. London, By Willyam Powell for Wyllyam Pickeringe.
Secondary sources to be posted this evening!
This week's episode focuses on the trial of Catherine Hayes, convicted of murdering her husband and executed for it in 1726.
Catherine Hayes was accused, along with two men, of murdering her abusive husband. The facts are just as fascinating now as they were in 1726. Spoiler alert: we'll see a preserved (pickled?) head, allegations of adultery and incest, and a horrifying botched execution.
Catherine Hayes and the two Thomases, decapitating Mr. Hayes. I was wrong about Catherine holding the candle – instead, she is depicted pointing to the infamous pail in which the head would go. Note also the wine on the table.
We'll then try to avoid being historical voyeurs–only interested in cases for their scandal and dramatic value–by focusing on what this case tells us about women who killed their husbands in the history of murder. We'll see how contemporaries thought this crime was unnatural and motivated by lust and lewdness – much like other crimes committed by women. We'll also see once again that the common law seems to have had no way to take into account a woman's abusive situation in determining her guilt when it comes to petty treason.
Note: If you do check out the case on the Old Bailey Online and the Ordinary's Accounts, Catherine's name is spelled differently in certain places. Your best bet is to search for Thomas Billings and find her in the associated records.
Today's episode looks at women in the history of murder.
First, we'll see how the law of murder applied differently to women than it did to men. One big difference is the fact that women weren't eligible to plead benefit of clergy until 1691, which meant they were (essentially) unable to be convicted of manslaughter. This is a drag for women who kill others through negligence and who are then executed for it. On the flip side, women could "plead the belly," meaning that they could have their date of execution postponed if they were pregnant.
Then, we'll look at early-modern ideas of female violence. While women were stereotypically associated with sneaky killing and poison, we'll see some women were entirely willing to beat the crap out of people in the public with their bare fists.
Finally, we'll look at the notion that it was a form of treason, and not just murder, when a wife killed her husband. This crime, called petty treason, carried with it the horrific punishment of burning women alive.
Notes on sources:
I encourage everyone and anyone to check out the Old Bailey Online!
Garthine Walker's wonderful book is Crime, Gender and Social Order in Early Modern England (Cambridge Studies in Early Modern British History). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
I also recommend Ruth Campbell (1984) Sentence of death by burning for women, The Journal of Legal History, 5:1, 44-59.
If anyone knows more about how the practice of burning women to death started, please let me know!
For anyone looking to learn more about Catherine Hayes, search the Old Bailey and check out this descriptively-named pamphlet:
A narrative of the barbarous and unheard of murder of Mr. John Hayes, by Catherine his wife, Thomas Billings, and Thomas Wood, on the 1st of March at night Wherein every minute Circumstance attending that Horrid Affair, and the wonderful Providence of God in the Discovery of the Actors therein, are faithfully and impartially related. Together with the Examinations and Confessions of the said Thomas Billings and Thomas Wood before several of His Majesty's Justices of the Peace. As also the Copy of a fictitious Letter that Catherine Hayes sent, as from her Husband, to his Mother in Worcestershire after his Death; and the Mother's Answer thereto: With some Account of the wicked Life and Conversation of the said Catherine, and likewise of those of Thomas Billings and Thomas Wood. To which are prefix'd, Their true and exact Effigies, drawn from the Life, and curiously engraved on Copper. Published with the Approbation of the Relations and Friends of the said Mr. John Hayes, 1727." • ImprintLondon : printed for, and sold by Thomas Warner at the Black-Boy in Pater-Noster-Row, E Nutt at the Royal Exchange, A. Dod at the Peacock without Temple-Bar, and by the Booksellers of London and Westminster, [1726]:
October 27, 2021 historyofmurderpodcast_st5s3k Uncategorized 0 Comments
Today we take a whirlwind tour through the controversial topic of felony murder and constructive malice!
In today's episode, we ask whether it is murder when someone kills someone else unintentionally but during the course of a serious crime (or a felony). Normally killing has to be intentional to qualify as murder – but does the criminal context change this rule? For instance, is it murder when a robber accidentally shoots a cashier during an armed robbery? What about when a kidnapper smothers someone by accident while kidnapping them?
Some modern common law jurisdictions are deeply divided on this topic, and we'll see why after looking at felony murder's chaotic history. We'll see early-modern common law superstars butt heads over obscure examples (is it murder when you go poaching but your arrow goes astray and kills a boy lurking in a nearby bush?). We'll also see how an early-eighteenth century attempt to clear things up just muddles it even more and ultimately gives us the term "felony murder." We'll ask what's so constructive about malice anyways. And finally, we'll see how theory and practice never quite seem to match up in this bizarre area of the law.
Warning: modern terms for what we're discussing today vary, particularly in the USA. Depending on the jurisdiction, you can find felony murder under a variety of names and degrees.
Got any comments on felony murder? Think I didn't come down hard enough on the doctrine, or conversely, that I was too critical of it? Send me your thoughts on our contact page or @murderhistorian on Twitter!
Be sure to subscribe on your podcast app. Click here to subscribe to Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and Google Podcasts. Follow us on Twitter @murderhistorian.
Sources and notes:
Guyora Binder's article, "The Origins of American Felony Murder Rules," Stanford Law Review, Oct., 2004, Vol. 57, No. 1 pp. 59-208 is the fullest history imaginable on this topic. If you're wondering what happened in the 19th century, go to Binder!
See Glanville Williams, "Constructive Malice Revived, "The Modern Law Review," Vol. 23, No. 6 (Nov., 1960), pp. 605-629 for an explanation of why DPP v Smith was wrongly decided.
Felony Murder as a First Degree Offense: An Anachronism Retained, 66 Yale L.J. (1957) is interesting, especially for its description of how felony murder became a first-degree murder offence in early post-Revolutionary USA
If you're wondering about the common-law felony "mayhem" (as I certainly was), check out this recent blog post from legal historian Gwen Seabourne
Welcome to today's episode on unintentional killing!
We all know (now) that if you kill someone intentionally, it's murder. But is it ever murder when someone kills someone else unintentionally?
Today, we look at a whole range of unintentional killings and ask whether they're murder, manslaughter, or sheer accident. Is it murder if you mean to kill one person but end up unintentionally killing another? What is it when you mean to give someone a little push or slap and end up killing them by accident? What if you mean to hurt someone really badly but end up killing them instead? And what if you just do something really stupid and kill someone by mistake?
Murder weapons vary widely in this episode. We'll see a man who tried to poison his wife with an apple, a blacksmith who killed his apprentice with a bar of iron, a roofer who killed a pedestrian with a shingle, and a provoked man who killed a woman with an unlucky broomstick throw.
Warning: modern terms for what we're discussing today vary widely, particularly in the USA. Depending on the jurisdiction, you can find not only different degrees of murder, but also degrees of manslaughter, as well as terms like felony murder and depraved heart murder.
Today's story about the boys on the overpass is inspired by a real-life modern case. You can read a news article about it here and here. In this case, the boys brought things to the overpass to throw off it and they aimed at hitting the cars. The boy who threw the fatal rock pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and the others pleaded guilty to manslaughter.
These boys shouldn't be singled out though. Edward Coke and Matthew Hale, writing in the seventeenth century, also talk about people throwing stones into crowds. And there's there notorious English case, R v Hancock and Shankland (1985), where two grown men dropped a concrete block on a road and killed a driver. In their defence, they said they only meant to intimidate the person in the car, not to kill anyone.
The blacksmith and the broomstick case are reported by Kelyng. The comment about the box on the ears and the blow with a little with a stick are from Holt, in Mawgridge's case. The story about the servant who shoots into the cornfield is from Hale. Kelyng and Hale both talk about the case with the roofer throwing tiles off a roof. The poison apple case is from Plowden.
While I refer to the idea of "great" or "grievous" bodily harm, the term doesn't appear consistently in the law until the nineteenth century. Nonetheless, the idea of intending to do harm that's likely to kill someone is distinguished from the idea of doing a little bit of harm much earlier than that. And Michael Foster writing in the mid-eighteenth century, emphasizes the distinction.
Michael Foster (1689–1763) – new century, new judicial hairdo. Foster is another one of my favourite sources on the history of murder.
October 6, 2021 historyofmurderpodcast_st5s3k Uncategorized 0 Comments
Today's bonus episode is on insults. It looks at which insults were considered to be the most provocative in the 17th century. We'll see that courts were willing to excuse men who flew into a homicidal rage upon having their noses tweaked, being jostled, having the wall taken from them, and being "filliped upon the forehead." We'll also see one of my favourite cases, which involves a leek, a Welshman, a scarecrow, and a hammer. Finally, we'll see these insults in action by looking at Act 1 Scene 1 of Romeo and Juliet.
If you like the podcast, please be sure to subscribe on your podcast app and give us a review! You can follow us on Twitter at @murderhistorian and check out the website at https://www.historyofmurderpodcast.com/
September 29, 2021 historyofmurderpodcast_st5s3k Uncategorized 0 Comments
Today's episode features a considerable amount of spontaneous stabbing. We start off with the famous case of Watts v Brains (1600), where the court has to deal with two major problems. First, is it OK to kill someone just because they make "a wry face" at you? Second, how do we prove malice aforethought (and therefore that someone committed murder) if one person kills another in the heat of the moment?
We go on to see how the famous judge, Sir Edward Coke, decides to solve these problems by changing the rules of the game. From now on, he tells us, we can just presume that it's murder when one person kills another without provocation.
This brings us on a whirlwind tour of the idea of provocation. Can you be provoked by verbal insults? Rude gestures? Slaps? The loss of a stranger's liberty? Adultery? What else? The answers may surprise you.
Most of these cases are reported by Kelyng and Hale. I selected them (and they are the usual ones selected) because they are featured in Mawgridge's case, decided by Holt in 1707.
For the quote I read (and for a great article), see Kesselring, K.J. "No Greater Provocation? Adultery and the Mitigation of Murder in English Law." Law and History Review 34, no. 1 (2016): 199-225. Accessed August 10, 2020.
The Old Bailey stats come from Jennine Hurl-Eamon, '"I Will Forgive You if the World Will': Wife Murder and Limits on Patriarchal Violence in London, 1690–1750," in Violence, Politics and Gender in Early Modern England, ed. Joseph P. Ward (Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke, 2008), 223–47.
For more on provocation, see Horder, Jeremy. 1992. Provocation and Responsibility. Oxford Monographs on Criminal Law and Justice. Oxford: Clarendon.
Who wore it better? From left to right, the Lord Chief Justices Sir Edward Coke (1613-1616), Sir John Kelyng (1665-1671) and Sir Matthew Hale (1671-1677).
I may have been a little unfair to Coke who was really just repeating the terms of the indictment in Mackalley's case in the section I read aloud. But the case truly is a nightmare to read, particularly when compared with Kelyng and Hale's writing, which is a lot clearer and more fun.
Bonus Episode: The Origins of the Word Murder: murdrum, morth, and malice aforethought
In today's bonus episode, we look at the origins of the terms "murder" and "malice aforethought." We see that "murder" comes from a few sources, including murdrum and morth. In the end, murder becomes strongly associated with secret killing, killing with no witnesses, or killing somewhere remote. This association brings the concept of murder closer to the concepts of ambush and premeditated killing. Perhaps this explains why murder ends up being defined as killing with "malice aforethought," a term which also strongly implies ambush and premeditation.
I gloss over a lot of debates in this one. First, I should point out that William the Conqueror may not have invented the murdrum fine, and that it might predate the Norman conquest and go back to the Danish conquest. The debate on this issue seems to stem from confusion among the medieval sources – one famous medieval legal writer, Bracton, says the law goes back to the time of the Danish King Canute, but earlier sources attribute the law to William. For more on this, see:
O'BRIEN, BRUCE. "Conquest and the Law." In Conquests in Eleventh-Century England: 1016, 1066, edited by Laura Ashe and Emily Joan Ward, NED-New edition., 41–64. Boydell & Brewer, 2020. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvrdf1qb.8.
And check out Maitland's essay on the Criminal Liability of the Hundred [the name of the community that was fined with the murdrum fine] in The Collected Papers of Frederic William Maitland, ed. H.A.L. Fisher (Cambridge University Press, 1911). 3 Vols. Vol. 1.
As I mentioned in the episode, and as these sources show, it's not entirely clear that the rationale for the law was to punish Anglo-Saxons for killing Danes or Normans and getting away with it.
For more on morth, check out Thomas Green's article (cited in episode 2), O'Brien, Maitland, and Johnson, Nelson E. "The Early History of the Crime of Murder." Brief, vol. 6, no. 4, 1906, p. 269-275. O'Brien argues that morth has more to do with a kind of killing for which the victim's family cannot receive compensation (perhaps because the perpetrator is unknown), as well as with treachery and treason.
You can find Richard II's statute on pardons if you have access to the volume of works called Statutes of the Realm. You can access the Statutes of the Realm via Heinonline. The citation is 13 Rich 2 c2 1389-90, also known as the Statute of Westminster (1390).
A painting by J. Coghlan
of Richard II languishing in prison. Presumably he is regretting his earlier lenience towards traitors and murderers.
Here is poor Richard, learning the hard way that murder and treason are no laughing matter.
Finally, if you are curious about the debate over whether "murder, killing by await, assault, or malice prepensed" is a list of synonyms or if they're all different concepts, check out Thomas Green's article, where he disagrees with historian J.L. Kaye on this. I'm on Team Green for this one.
Episode 2: Medieval Murder and the Birth of Manslaughter
Welcome to our first fully historical episode of the History of Murder Podcast!
In today's episode, we look back at the history of murder law in medieval England. We'll see a major problem with it: there's only one punishment for all kinds of killing, and that punishment is death. Do we really want to punish everyone who kills someone else with death? Is it fair to punish everyone in the same way? Don't we want to punish the serial killer more than we want to punish the random person who killed someone during a bar fight? These problems give rise to the birth of manslaughter, but not before we take a detour through one of the weirdest concepts in the common law, benefit of clergy.
The murder of Archbishop Thomas Becket in Canterbury Cathedral. Not only a classic medieval murder, but a pivotal one for the development of manslaughter (via benefit of clergy).
In this episode, I rely heavily on the following article by Thomas Green and take the Walter and Thomas example from it. Note that their case is a mere footnote in this enormous and very rich article!
Thomas A. Green, "The Jury and the English Law of Homicide, 1200-1600," Mich. L. Rev. 74 (1976): 413-99. Available for download here.
You can find John Salisbury's case reported by Plowden in The Commentaries, Or Reports of Edmund Plowden, Containing Divers Cases Upon Matters of Law, Argued and Adjudged in the Several Reigns of King Edward VI., Queen Mary, King and Queen Philip and Mary, and Queen Elizabeth [1548-1579] (Part 1), available here on Google books (pp 100-101 of the original text, but note the strange pagination).
For a great overview of benefit of clergy and the early years of manslaughter, check out the introductory chapter to Kesselring, K. J. 2019. Making Murder Public : Homicide in Early Modern England, 1480-1680 (version First edition.) First ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Episode 1: Welcome to the History of Murder Podcast!