text:
NY Cty. Ct.
PEOPLE v. BANKS
County Court, Westchester County, New York.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York v. Andre BANKS, Defendant.
Decided: July 06, 2007
Legal Aid Society of Westchester County, White Plains (Stephan J. Pittari and Raymond Volper of counsel), for defendant. Janet DiFiore, District Attorney, White Plains (Patricia Murphy of counsel), for plaintiff.
Defendant has been indicted for the crimes of murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree, three counts of attempted murder in the first degree, three counts of attempted murder in the second degree, four counts of assault in the first degree, two counts of reckless endangerment, robbery in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree in connection with the July 3, 2005 shooting and robbery at the Cibao Deli in Greenburgh which resulted in the death of Angel Noelio Cabrera and the injury of Jose and Pedro Pena.
Defendant seeks to elicit expert testimony at trial regarding certain psychological phenomena that affect the reliability of identification testimony. By letters to the Court dated June 11 and 13, 2007, defendant made an offer of proof regarding this proposed expert testimony. In his June 11 letter, defendant proffered Steven D. Penrod, Ph.D., J.D., as an expert capable of assisting the jury in evaluating the reliability of eye witness identifications in six areas. Specifically, these areas are 1) that high levels of stress negatively affect identification accuracy and eyewitness recall; 2) that increased exposure time 1 of a witness to the perpetrator at the time of the crime is associated with improved performance in making a correct identification; 3) that a partial disguise worn by a perpetrator diminishes recognition of the perpetrator by the witness; 4) that the retention interval 2 is an important determinant of correct identifications; 5) that there is a low correlation between the confidence of a witness and the correctness of a witness' identification and 6) that there is an cross-race bias which impairs the ability of witnesses of one race to make correct identifications of perpetrators of a different race. Additionally, at the Frye hearing, defendant proffered testimony regarding the psychological phenomena of mug shot induced bias 3 and weapons focus 4 , based upon the factual recitations contained in his June 13 letter.
In that letter, defendant argued that such psychological expert testimony is necessary here because this case involves little or no corroborative evidence and because all of the identification witnesses were shown photo arrays containing defendant's photograph prior to the line-up. Specifically, defendant noted that he was identified by four individuals-Jose Pena, Pedro Pena, Nelson Pena and Phillip Shands. As to Jose Pena, defendant notes that this witness saw a gun before he was shot and saw the perpetrator with cornrows wearing a gray "hoodie" before he ran from the store. The defendant submits that this was an extremely stressful experience, and notes that the witness failed to identify the defendant with cornrows from a photo array two days later. Jose Pena did identify the defendant (with a shaved head) from a photo array on August 25, 2006 and identified him from a line-up on October 16, 2006. As to Pedro Pena, defendant notes that this witness saw the shooter taking money from the cash register, and then saw the shooter point the gun at him and shoot him before he turned and ran. When shown a photo array two days later with defendant's picture, Pedro was unable to make an identification but indicated that the defendant's photo appeared to be the person he had seen, but that he was uncertain. Defendant notes that Pedro Pena identified him as the shooter fifteen months later at the October 16, 2006 line-up. Defendant alleges that Pedro Pena later said that he did not get a good look at the shooter's face. As to Nelson Pena, the defendant notes that this witness was outside the store when the shooter walked out after shooting Jose, Pedro and the deceased. Nelson saw the shooter aim at his head and fire a shot, at which point Nelson hit the pavement to avoid being shot. Defendant alleges that Nelson Pena did not identify defendant's photo and did not identify the defendant as the shooter until the lineup of October 16, 2006. As to Phillip Shands, who was an eyewitness to the crime, defendant notes that the witness stated that he viewed the shooter from 50' away and alleges that the shooter had his back to him. Defendant notes that while Shands claimed to recognize the shooter and learned his name a few weeks after the shooting, Shands did not give this information to the police when he called them to report the shooting, nor when he gave a sworn statement a week later. Defendant notes that Shands first identified the defendant from one photo array on September 22, 2005, but that he failed to identify defendant from a different array. Shands also identified the defendant at the October 16, 2007 line-up. In addition to these four witnesses, the defendant notes that a fifth individual, Juan Guzman, who was present in the store during the shootings, allegedly saw the perpetrator taking money from the register and was not shot at by the perpetrator, never made any identification of the defendant, despite being shown photo arrays. Thus, defendant submits that because of the lack of corroborative evidence, coupled with the circumstances surrounding the witness' respective viewing of the perpetrator and their subsequent identifications (and non-identifications) of the defendant as the perpetrator, expert testimony regarding phenomena affecting eyewitness identification is relevant and appropriate in this case.
Pursuant to defendant's offer of proof, on June 14 and June 28, 2007, this Court held a Frye hearing regarding defendant's proposed expert witness testimony. Both parties also submitted post hearing memoranda in support of their respective positions. At the hearing, the defendant called Dr. Steven Penrod, Distinguished Professor of Psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, and, at the continuation of the hearing on June 28, submitted as exhibits Dr. Penrod's curriculum vitae, as well as a survey conducted by Dr. Penrod and Tarika Daftary entitled "General Acceptance among Experts of Eyewitness Research Findings: A June 2007 Update" (hereinafter, "Penrod survey"). The People did not call their own witness at the hearing; however, they offered into evidence as an exhibit a survey by Dr. Saul Kassin, et al., entitled, "On the General Acceptance' of Eyewitness Testimony Research-A New Survey of the Experts", which was published in American Psychologist in May, 2001 (hereinafter, "Kassin survey").
Dr. Penrod testified at the Frye hearing that the above psychological phenomena have been generally accepted as reliable by the scientific community of psychologists who conduct research in the field of eye witness identification. In support of his conclusions, Dr. Penrod referred to several research studies and "meta-analysis", which is "a statistical method used to synthesize large numbers of separate but related studies to determine if there is a general effect that can reliably be ascertained." (People v. Williams, supra ). However, aside from the Penrod survey, none of these studies were introduced into evidence by the defendant. Defendant submits that Dr. Penrod's testimony, including his references to research studies undertaken in the field, as well as the Penrod survey, establish that the above phenomena have been accepted as generally reliable in the relevant scientific community.
The People oppose the admissibility of testimony by Dr. Penrod regarding only certain areas of eyewitness identification phenomena 5 . The People concede that there is little or no corroborating evidence in this case (Tr. p. 3). Given this, the People recognize that pursuant to the recent Court of Appeals decision in People v. LeGrand, 8 N.Y.3d 449, 835 N.Y.S.2d 523, 867 N.E.2d 374 (2007), certain areas of expert testimony regarding eyewitness identifications are admissible at trial. Thus, the People do not challenge the admissibility of such testimony regarding the relationship between witness confidence and accuracy of identifications, testimony regarding the effect of post-event information on accuracy and testimony regarding confidence malleability (People v. LeGrand, supra at 458, 835 N.Y.S.2d 523, 867 N.E.2d 374; People's Memorandum on Eyewitness Identification Expert Testimony ("People's Memo"), p. 1). The People oppose the admissibility of the remaining phenomenon identified by defendant and submit that these phenomenon do not meet the standard for admissibility set forth in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C.Cir.1923).
1. The Effect of the Court of Appeals LeGrand Decision
As an initial matter, the Court notes that the LeGrand decision covers several phenomena for which the defendant here seeks expert testimony, and thus, as it is conceded that this is a case with little or no corroborative evidence, such testimony is admissible here. Thus, the Court will allow expert testimony regarding the phenomenon which demonstrates that there is a low correlation between a witness' confidence and the accuracy of the witness' identification (People v. LeGrand, supra at 458, 835 N.Y.S.2d 523, 867 N.E.2d 374). In addition to the phenomena regarding the relationship of confidence to accuracy, the LeGrand decision also found as admissible the phenomenon regarding "the effect of post event information on accuracy of identification" (People v. LeGrand, supra ). While neither the defendant's submissions nor Dr. Penrod specifically referred to this particular phenomenon by name, it is clear that several of the phenomena for which the defendant seeks testimony falls within the ambit of post-event information. Specifically, these phenomena are increased exposure time, retention interval and mug shot induced bias.
While the Court of Appeals in LeGrand did not substantially discuss what constitutes "post event information", the underlying Supreme Court decision which it reversed described the phenomenon in detail. In that decision, post-event information was described as the "impact of various types of suggestion, such as that involved in lineup and photo array procedures and post-identification feedback suggesting the identification was correct, on the witness's [sic] recollection of a perpetrator's appearance" and that "witnesses exposed to this type of post-event information tend to incorporate it into their memory of the actual event". (People v. LeGrand, 196 Misc.2d 179, 193, 747 N.Y.S.2d 733 (Sup.Ct. N.Y. Co.2002)). While not using the specific nomenclature of "mug shot bias" or "retention interval", a fair reading of the description of "post event information" overlaps with these two other areas identified by the defendant in this case. Similarly, increased exposure time is a concept so inter-related with retention interval, in that they both relate to how human memory is formed and the impact that time can have on the formation of memory, that this concept can also be seen as an aspect of mug shot bias.
Thus, the concepts of mug shot bias, retention interval and exposure duration substantially overlap in interpretations and explanations of post event information affecting eyewitness identifications. Since the Court of Appeals in LeGrand recognized the admissibility of expert testimony regarding post-event information in cases with little or no corroborating evidence, this Court will allow testimony on these phenomena, as well as the phenomenon regarding witness confidence, subject to the defendant's laying of a proper foundation at trial and to the limitations regarding such testimony set forth below.
Having decided that the LeGrand case controls as to four of the eight eyewitness phenomena for which the defendant seeks expert testimony at trial, we now address the admissibility of testimony as to the remaining phenomena of stress, partial disguise, own-race bias and weapons focus.
2. The Frye Test
In New York, courts assessing the admissibility of expert testimony apply the four prong test set forth in Frye v. United States, supra (see People v. Wesley, 83 N.Y.2d 417, 611 N.Y.S.2d 97, 633 N.E.2d 451 (1994)). Using the Frye test, the court must determine whether such proposed testimony is (1) relevant to the witness' identification, (2) proffered by a qualified expert, (3) on a topic beyond the ken of the average juror and (4) based on principles that are generally accepted as reliable by the scientific community. (People v. LeGrand, supra at 452, 835 N.Y.S.2d 523, 867 N.E.2d 374). Moreover, the admissibility and bounds of expert testimony are addressed primarily to the sound discretion of the trial court (People v. Cronin, 60 N.Y.2d 430, 432, 470 N.Y.S.2d 110, 458 N.E.2d 351 (1983)). The Court addresses each of the Frye factors in turn below.
A. Is the proposed testimony relevant to the witnesses' identifications?
As noted above, this case involves the identification of the defendant as the perpetrator of the shootings and robbery by four eye witnesses. An additional witness to the shooting failed to identify the defendant as the perpetrator. The facts of the case involve a weapon which was seen by these witnesses, and in three of the four cases, involved the perpetrator firing the weapon at the witness, an obviously stressful situation. The description of the perpetrator which was given to the police noted that he had cornrows and was wearing a "hoodie" and therefore that his head was at least partially obscured. All of the identifying witnesses were shown photographic arrays containing the defendant's photo prior to identifying the defendant at a lineup, and in some cases, failed to identify the defendant from the photo arrays. At least three of the four identifying witnesses are Hispanic; the defendant is African American, so cross-race issues are potentially implicated.
Given these facts, the expert testimony sought to elicited by the defendant is relevant, since it goes directly to the heart of this case; i.e. the identity of the perpetrator of the shooting and robbery at the Cibao Deli, as well as the facts and circumstances surrounding the identifications (see People v. Williams, supra ).
B. Is the proposed testimony proffered by a qualified expert?
The Court finds Dr. Steven Penrod to be an expert qualified to testify about psychological phenomena affecting eye witness identification. At the Frye hearing, in addition to defendant's proffering of his curriculum vitae, Dr. Penrod testified that he has a Bachelor's Degree from Yale College, a law degree from Harvard University, and a Ph.D. in psychology, also from Harvard. He testified that he held faculty positions at the University of Wisconsin in Madison, the University of Minnesota and the University of Nebraska before joining the faculty at John Jay, where he is among only two percent of his fellow faculty as a Distinguished Professor. Dr. Penrod testified that he has authored approximately 60 publications relating to eyewitness identification, with about 25 of those publications reporting peer reviewed research in peer reviewed scientific journals and the remaining publications being chapters in books or books relating to eyewitness identification. He is a member of the National Science Foundation Law and Social Sciences Program, from which he has received several research grants. He stated that his research primarily involves eyewitness identification issues and jury decision making issues.
While the People challenge several of the areas of eyewitness phenomenon sought to be elicited by the defendant at trial, they do not challenge Dr. Penrod's qualifications. Hearing testimony established that Dr. Penrod has impressive educational and professional credentials in this field, and thus, the Court finds him qualified to testify as an expert in this matter.
C. Is the proposed testimony beyond the ken of the average juror?
The Court finds the proposed testimony to be beyond the ken of the average juror. While jurors may have familiarity through their own life experience with some of the factors relevant to the reliability of eyewitness identifications, the issue here is whether the expert's specialized knowledge can give the jurors more perspective than they can get from their own experiences (People v. Young, 7 N.Y.3d 40, 45, 817 N.Y.S.2d 576, 850 N.E.2d 623 (2006)). As to proposed testimony regarding eyewitness identification phenomena, the Court of Appeals has stated that "it cannot be said that psychological studies regarding the accuracy of an identification are within the ken of the typical juror." (People v. Lee, 96 N.Y.2d 157, 162, 726 N.Y.S.2d 361, 750 N.E.2d 63 (2001), citing People v. Cronin, 60 N.Y.2d 430, 470 N.Y.S.2d 110, 458 N.E.2d 351 (1983)). Therefore, the Court finds that the testimony proposed here is beyond the ken of the average juror.
D. Is the proposed testimony based on principles that are generally accepted as reliable by the scientific community?
This prong of the Frye test requires the trial court to determine whether there is a general consensus among scientists within the relevant community that the proposed testimony is reliable (People v. Smith, 2 Misc.3d 1007(A), 2004 WL 690321 (2004)). This question involves considering whether a sufficient number of other experts in the same field accept the reliability of the research findings (Marsh v. Smyth, 12 A.D.3d 307, 311, 785 N.Y.S.2d 440 (1st Dept.2004)). It is a test which emphasizes "counting scientists' votes rather than on verifying the soundness of a scientific conclusion." (People v. Wesley, 83 N.Y.2d 417, 439, 611 N.Y.S.2d 97, 633 N.E.2d 451 (1994)). As the party proffering such expert testimony, the burden is on the defendant to lay the proper foundation that the proposed testimony meets this test (People v. Smith, supra ).
A threshold consideration in applying this prong of the Frye test is defining the relevant scientific community. "If the field is too narrowly defined, the judgment of the scientific community will devolve into a few experts. The field must still include scientists who would be expected to be familiar with the particular use of the evidence at issue, however, whether through actual or theoretical research." (People v. Wesley, supra at 439, 611 N.Y.S.2d 97, 633 N.E.2d 451 (J. Kaye, concurring) (citations omitted)).
At the Frye hearing, the People argued that the relevant scientific community should be the membership of the American Psychological Association (APA), which they allege has 148,000 members, or in the alternative, the membership of the American Psychology Law Society, which they allege has 2,613 members. Dr. Penrod disputed that either of these organizations are the appropriate relevant scientific community in this case. As to the APA, Dr. Penrod noted that the vast majority of psychologists are not researchers, but rather practice psychology in a therapeutic setting, and therefore could not be expected to have any significant familiarity with research regarding eyewitness identification phenomena. As to the Law Society, of which Dr. Penrod is a member and former president thereof, he noted that even within this subset of the psychological community, most members are not researchers, but rather psychologists who work within or in tandem with the court system in various clinical settings. In contrast, Dr. Penrod argued, and this Court agrees, that the appropriate scientific community is psychologists who have conducted research in the field of eye witness identification, which Dr. Penrod estimates is comprised of about 250 individuals world wide. These individuals can be expected to be "familiar with the particular use of the evidence at issue"; i.e., whether and/or how such eye witness phenomena affect the accuracy of witness identifications (see People v. Williams, supra ).
Addressing each of the remaining proposed areas of expert testimony, the Court finds as follows:
i. Stress
In support of his conclusion that the relevant scientific community generally accepts as reliable the proposition that stress negatively affects eyewitness accuracy, Dr. Penrod testified at the Frye hearing as to a meta-analysis by "Deffenbacher and Bornstein", as well as a study by Charles Morgan regarding the effects of stress on soldiers undergoing simulated prisoner of war interrogations. Dr. Penrod testified that the general conclusion of these studies is that "the primary effect of stress is on hit rates, but the net effect is that of all identifications made by witnesses, the proportion of incorrect identifications goes up significantly․ [B]ecause you've got a mix of correct and incorrect identifications, as the number of correct identifications goes down, you get a higher proportion of incorrect identifications." (Tr. p. 15). In other words, while stress does not cause an increase in false identifications, it causes a decrease in the amount of correct identifications, which leads to a higher proportion of false identifications (Tr. p. 74).
On cross examination, the People moved the Kassin survey into evidence and noted that based upon that survey, only 4 of 64 respondents found the proposition that "very high levels of stress impair the accuracy of eyewitness testimony" to be very reliable and only 19 of 64 found the proposition to be generally reliable. Thus, applying the Frye standard, the proposition regarding the affects of stress was found reliable by only 36% of the relevant scientific community. Moreover, the Kassin survey itself, in its introductory paragraph, notes that by an agreement rate of at least 80%, there was a strong consensus that several phenomena were sufficiently reliable to be presented in Court; however, stress is not listed among these phenomena considered sufficiently reliable. In response, Dr. Penrod noted that the Kassin survey was published in 2001, which was before either the Deffenbacher meta-analysis or the Morgan study was published. Based upon his interaction and conversations with other researchers in the field, Dr. Penrod opined that, as a result of additional research since 2001, the results for reliability would be much higher if the survey was taken now.
Indeed, after the hearing on June 14, Dr. Penrod himself undertook an updated survey which was modeled on the Kassin survey, and the defendant moved this into evidence at the continuation of the hearing on June 28. This new survey found that 54%, or 34 of 63 respondents found the proposition regarding stress to be either generally or very reliable, an increase that Dr. Penrod noted was significant 6 . Additionally, since 41.5% of the respondents indicated that they had not read the Morgan article (because, Dr. Penrod submits, it was published in a psychiatric and not psychological journal), Dr. Penrod opined that if that article had been read, one could expect the percentage to be even stronger.
On cross examination, the People elicited that the survey was created and distributed to respondents after the June 14 hearing, and that respondents only had 30 hours to submit the completed survey to be counted in the results. Dr. Penrod conceded that the survey was created after the hearing on June 14, and that in addition to using the survey in this case, he intended to eventually publish it. It was also elicited that the survey was sent to researchers known to Dr. Penrod, although Dr. Penrod stated that he knows virtually all the researchers in this field. Moreover, the People noted that the first version of the survey, which was submitted in advance of the continuation of the hearing, had several errors in it which were corrected in the amended version submitted in court on June 28.
The Court finds that the defendant has failed to meet his burden in demonstrating that the proposition that high levels of stress negatively affect identification accuracy and eyewitness recall has been found to be reliable by a general consensus of the relevant scientific community. It is difficult to precisely define when a scientific principle crosses the line from the experimental to the demonstrative stage; the Frye decision itself refers to this area as "the twilight zone" (Frye v. United States, supra at 1014; People v. Williams, supra ). The proposition that high levels of stress negatively affect eyewitness identifications is one of these "twilight zone" areas. Indeed, even Dr. Penrod himself admitted that, in the universe of eyewitness identification phenomena, "agreement is not as high with respect to stress as it has [been] with respect to some other factors" (Tr. p. 23).
Given the information presented to the Court at the hearing, it cannot be said that defendant has demonstrated a general consensus as to reliability of the particular phenomenon of stress as it relates to eyewitness identifications. It is noted that although the Deffenbacher meta-analysis and the Morgan study were considered to be very important by Dr. Penrod for the increase in the acceptance within the scientific community, the defendant did not move these studies into evidence at the hearing so that the Court could review them. The Kassin survey demonstrates that as of 2001, there was little consensus within the scientific community that this particular phenomenon was reliable, as only about a third of respondents found it so. While defendant submits that Dr. Penrod's new survey shows a significantly increased rate of acceptance of reliability, little more than half, or 34 of the respondents accepted the proposition as reliable. Moreover, the People's criticisms of this new survey are well taken. It was admittedly created for this specific litigation, with respondents having only 30 hours to submit their answers. While Dr. Penrod states that he intends to eventually publish the survey, it has not yet been published or subjected to the peer review process. This is significant as the first draft contained errors which were corrected in an amended survey, but there may be other errors that are not readily evident to persons who are not psychologists or statisticians. It would be expected that the peer review process would expose and lead to a correction of any such errors. For these reasons, the Court finds that the defendant has not met his burden establishing that the proposition that high levels of stress negatively affect identification accuracy and eyewitness recall has been found to be generally accepted by the relevant scientific community. Defendant's motion to admit the proffered expert testimony as to the phenomenon of stress is denied.
ii. Partial Disguise
In support of his conclusion that the relevant scientific community generally accepts as reliable the proposition that a partial disguise worn by a perpetrator diminishes recognition of the perpetrator by the witness, Dr. Penrod testified at the Frye hearing as to two studies-one conducted by himself and Peter Shapiro in 1986, and another which he conducted with an un-named graduate student while at the University of Wisconsin. In the study conducted with Shapiro, the appearance of individuals were manipulated by having them take off items such as mustaches, beards and hats and having subjects attempt identifications. Dr. Penrod testified that the results of that study were that if appearances of the perpetrator were changed, correct identification rates go down and "you get more false alarms with a change of appearance". (Tr. p. 49). As to the study done in Wisconsin, Dr. Penrod stated that subjects were shown one of two versions of a videotape of a robbery, one with the perpetrator wearing a knit hat which sat above the ears and covered the hairline and one where the perpetrator was not wearing any hat. Dr. Penrod's recollection of the results of this experiment was that, when the perpetrator wore the hat, the "hit rates dropped from like 47 percent to 25 percent." (Tr. p. 50). Dr. Penrod opined that the obscuring of the hairline by the hat was responsible for this result, as this is "probably the most important cue ․ that people use to differentiate people from one another." (Id.).
The Court finds that defendant has not met his burden in proving that the relevant scientific community generally accepts as reliable the proposition that a partial disguise worn by a perpetrator diminishes recognition of the perpetrator by the witness. There were only two studies cited by Dr. Penrod in support of his position that this phenomenon regarding disguise has been accepted as generally reliable. Neither of these studies were provided to the Court, nor were their full titles given. As to the Wisconsin study, Dr. Penrod did not even state when this study was conducted. He also did not indicate whether these studies were published and subjected to peer review. Moreover, unlike the other phenomena at issue in this case, this phenomenon was not included in the Kassin survey, or even in Dr. Penrod's updated survey, so other than Dr. Penrod's testimony, there is no independent measurement of the general acceptance in the relevant scientific community for this proposition. For these reasons, defendant's motion to admit the proffered expert testimony as to the phenomenon of partial disguise is denied.
iii. Cross-race bias
In support of his conclusion that the relevant scientific community generally accepts as reliable the proposition that there is an cross-race bias which impairs the ability of witnesses of one race to make correct identifications of perpetrators of a different race, Dr. Penrod testified at the Frye hearing as to a meta-analysis done by Meissner and Brigham in 2001. This meta-analysis covered about 100 studies and about 5,000 research participants. Dr. Penrod testified that the findings of this meta-analysis demonstrated a 56% increase in false identifications when making other race identifications as opposed to same race identifications, and a 40% improvement in correct identifications for same race as opposed to other race identifications (Tr. p. 46). Dr. Penrod stated that "[a]t the end of the day they were saying you were 2.2 times more likely to make a correct identification, find the perpetrator, avoid mis-identifying somebody else. You're 2.2. times more likely to be correct in a same race as opposed to other race situation." (Tr. p. 47). When asked if this phenomenon occurred across all racial groups, Dr. Penrod replied that "the largest number of studies by far are with black and white", (Id.), but that he did recall a study done in El Paso, Texas involving non-Hispanic Caucasians and Hispanics. Dr. Penrod did not mention any studies demonstrating such a bias between Hispanics and African Americans.
The Court finds that defendant has not met his burden in proving that the relevant scientific community accepts as reliable the proposition on cross-race bias as it relates to Hispanic witnesses. While there is a growing trend in the scientific research which suggests that a witness may have an own-race bias which impairs the accuracy of cross-racial identifications, scientists disagree as to which racial groups it applies (see People v. Carrieri, 4 Misc.3d 307, 308, 777 N.Y.S.2d 627 (Sup.Ct. Queens Co.2004), citing State v. Cromedy, 158 N.J. 112, 120, 727 A.2d 457 (1999)). Here, the expert concedes that most of the research deals with black/white racial identifications, and the one study he could recall with Hispanics (which, again, was not provided to the Court), involved Hispanics and Caucasians. With the exception of Shands, who is African American and to whom this phenomenon would not apply in any event, the witnesses here are Hispanic; the defendant is African American. No evidence was adduced at the hearing in support of the cross-race bias occurring between these two groups. For this reason, defendant's motion to admit the proffered expert testimony as to the phenomenon of cross-race bias is denied.
iv. Weapons focus
The Court finds that the defendant has demonstrated that the relevant scientific community generally accepts as reliable the proposition that the phenomenon of "weapons focus" impairs the ability of a witness to make a subsequent identification of the perpetrator. At the hearing, Dr. Penrod pointed to the results of the Kassin survey, which found that 66% of respondents found the phenomenon to be very reliable or generally reliable, and to his own survey which found that 65% of respondents found the proposition to be either reliable or generally reliable. He also referred to a meta-analysis by Nancy Steblay and a more recent study by Kerri Pickel that supported these findings.
When questioned about the lower court opinion in LeGrand, which found that the phenomenon of weapons focus had not been generally accepted as reliable by the relevant scientific community, and which part of that decision had been upheld by the Court of Appeals, Dr. Penrod offered explanations as to why the lower court's analysis and rejection of the research in support of this proposition was flawed. He testified that the lower court's conclusion that the meta-analysis did not adequately represent the majority of studies on weapons focus (see People v. LeGrand, supra at 458, 835 N.Y.S.2d 523, 867 N.E.2d 374) was incorrect from a statistical point of view, as it involved merely counting the studies and comparing their results, which ignores the way meta-analysis weighs different factors to account for variables and ignores the way statistical significance is determined. Dr. Penrod further testified that, as a matter of statistics, in order to negate the conclusion of the meta-analysis that there is a relationship between weapons focus and the accuracy of witness' identifications, "a couple of hundred studies, each of which show no relationship" between the two factors would be required. (Tr. p. 103). Dr. Penrod's explanation of why the lower court in LeGrand was incorrect in this regard closely mirrored the reasoning given by Dr. Elizabeth Kovera in People v. Williams, supra, which granted the defendant's motion in that case to offer testimony on the phenomenon of weapons focus. Dr. Penrod further criticized the lower court's LeGrand decision for noting that the research was a "work in progress", as virtually all scientific research is a work in progress and that the existing research demonstrated that there is a "reliable conclusion that [can be offered] on the effects of weapons focus." (Tr. p. 107). Lastly, Dr. Penrod took issue with the lower court for noting that only 77% of the respondents to the Kassin survey would testify in court about weapons focus, as there are many reasons for not wanting to testify in court, including that some researchers simply prefer to focus on their research as opposed to holding themselves out as expert witnesses, or being nervous about testifying in open court and subjecting themselves to cross-examination.
For the above reasons, this Court grants defendant's motion for expert testimony as to the phenomenon of "weapons focus" and its effect on the accuracy of eyewitness identifications.
The defendant's expert, Dr. Steven Penrod, may testify at trial in this matter regarding the psychological phenomena of the low correlation between the confidence of a witness and the accuracy of that witness' identification, mug-shot bias and the related phenomena of increased exposure time and retention interval, and weapons focus. The expert may not testify as to the phenomena of stress, partial disguise or cross-race bias. Furthermore, the expert may not testify as to his opinion regarding the accuracy of any identification by any witness in this case. Additionally, the expert may not offer an opinion as to whether any of psychological phenomena outlined above actually influenced any of the identifications (or non-identifications) in this case. In sum, the expert is limited to setting forth the relevant psychological factors and interpreting the research data that demonstrate an effect on memory and perception (see People v. Drake, 7 N.Y.3d 28, 31, 817 N.Y.S.2d 583, 850 N.E.2d 630 (2006); see generally People v. Taylor, 75 N.Y.2d 277, 293, 552 N.Y.S.2d 883, 552 N.E.2d 131 (1990); People v. Brooks, 128 Misc.2d 608, 617, 490 N.Y.S.2d 692 (Sup.Ct.West.Co.1985)).
This decision constitutes the Order of the Court.
1. "Increased exposure time" refers to the phenomenon that a longer a person is exposed to a face the more likely that person will make a correct identification at a later time (People v. Williams, 14 Misc.3d 571, 830 N.Y.S.2d 452 (Sup.Ct. Kings Co.2006)).
2. The "retention interval" was defined the Frye hearing by defendant's expert as the time between the initial viewing of the perpetrator by the witness and the witness' subsequent identification of someone as the perpetrator (see Transcript of June 14 Frye hearing, ("Tr.") p. 34).
3. "Mug shot induced bias" occurs when a witness sees a mug shot or photo array containing a suspect and then is more likely to identify the suspect later in a lineup, regardless of whether or not the suspect is the actual perpetrator (see People v. Williams, supra ).
4. "Weapon focus" is the phenomenon which occurs when, during the course of a crime, a witness is exposed to a weapon, and the witness focuses his or her attention on the weapon and not on the perpetrator's face, which impairs the ability of the witness to make a subsequent identification of the perpetrator (see People v. Williams, supra ).
5. The People also argue that the defendant's June 11, 2007 offer of proof did not mention the specific phenomena of weapons focus or mug shot bias, and therefore testimony on these topics should not be allowed. However, this argument does not take into consideration defendant's further offer of proof letter dated June 13, 2007. While this letter fails to explicitly cite the phenomena of "weapon focus" or "mug shot bias" by those names, it clearly refers to the presence of a weapon while the various witnesses viewed the perpetrator, and notes that all of the identification witnesses were shown photo arrays containing the defendant's picture prior to identifying the defendant at a lineup. Moreover, as noted infra, many of these psychological phenomena are inter-related, so narrowly construing the offer of proof to cover only some aspects of a larger phenomenon does not provide a complete picture of how the phenomenon works. Thus, the Court accepts defendant's offer of proof as covering weapons focus and mug shot bias as well as the six phenomena referred to in defendant's June 11 letter.
6. In table 5b of the Penrod survey, stress is listed as having been found as generally reliable by 79% of the respondents. However, it is noted that the percentages represent the number of respondents who rated that phenomena as either "tends to favor", "generally reliable" or "very reliable". However, the Frye standard relates to whether the relevant scientific community finds the proposition at issue to be generally accepted by the scientific community, not whether the research "tends to favor" the proposition. Thus, excluding those who found that the research "tends to favor" the proposition, as opposed to those who found it reliable, the correct percentage is 54%.
BARBARA G. ZAMBELLI, J.


I get this question all the time from well-meaning friends and concerned neighbors who see pictures of my son in a camp for kids with cancer and chronic medical conditions and wonder if there is something I am not telling them about my son's condition. It's hard to explain to them what going to Camp Simcha has done for my child and our family. It's one of those things that you need to experience to understand, and trust me, no one ever wants to pay the steep entrance ticket to experience Camp Simcha.
I didn't want to send my son to Simcha. I had conversations with different people in Chai Lifeline after we received the invitation, and I was sure that I was going to be putting my son in a situation he didn't belong. I imagined a camp full of sick kids in treatment for cancer with my son, the kid recovering from a craniotomy to remove a tumor that wasn't going to kill him. I tried to look at his surgery like an appendectomy. We removed it. He recovered. Carry on.
But that first year after his surgery proved that philosophy wrong and unrealistic. School, which had been easy for him, was suddenly a nightmare. Everything was difficult. The medications he was taking affected his days and nights and we were constantly taking him back to the doctors, sending him into the hospital for overnight tests, and waiting in trepidation for whatever the next MRI would reveal. I missed so many days of work and was so distracted from my job that I was sometimes surprised when I saw a paycheck clear in my account. I was changed. I knew that no matter what, from the day of the surgery and onward, nothing would ever be the same. The invisible safety net that I had thought always surrounded my family had been snatched away, and so, even as my son improved, the worries never abated. I would walk to his room in the morning and hold my breath before opening the door, bracing myself in case I couldn't wake him. Fearing that maybe he had suffered a seizure in the night. Scared constantly by all the what-ifs.
And with those fatalistic and scary thoughts came the equally crippling fear that maybe I was crazy. Maybe I was making things larger than they actually were. I knew of kids in far worse situations. Kids who were not going to camp. Kids who spent months in the hospital to his sporadic nights. It was difficult to balance – the happiness at his health and the pain of others. As he grew stronger and healthier, my guilt in that health grew. I was embarrassed by my worries, ashamed at my good fortune. And every time I tried to take stock, get grounded, and just close that door – go back to that time before my world changed – I couldn't. With every good report, I found myself waiting, always waiting, for whatever bad news I felt would come next– news that I almost felt I deserved.
Perhaps he felt that. My son, who was the focus of my constant hovering and questions, who sensed that when I kissed him goodnight, I cried in the shower later that evening. That I measured out my days since his surgery in moments and pieces instead of long years, always believing in the back of my mind that we were living on borrowed time.
We are so hard wired to be normal. To be just like everyone else. For us, putting on that face of normalcy conflicted with the very real underlying feelings that we were so far from that, and would probably always be, try as we may to remedy it. In many ways, it was isolating. We existed between two worlds. The world of pediatric brain tumors where we were the best case scenario and couldn't express our worries and fears to our new friends who had it so much worse, and the friendly neighborhood world of skinned knees and strep throat where there was no one who could fathom what our day to day was like. Somewhere in that mix of emotions and stress and tears and relief, was my son. Struggling with his own fears, his own experience, and his own understanding that no matter how much I downplayed the next MRI, he knew what was at stake.
So then Camp Simcha came along.
We watched him change that first year in camp, becoming more confident than we had ever seen. Mainly, and in his own words, he said he goes there and feels "normal," though ironically, if you saw him during the year, you would never imagine that he thinks otherwise. My friends and neighbors would never believe it. But then, they aren't witness to the types of conversations he has with his counselors. They don't realize that his closest friends are much older than him. They can't understand that he went into that surgery as a child, and emerged more mature than some of the adults I know and is light years beyond the typical 11-year-old in terms of his experiences, his thoughts, and his ability to empathize with others.
I carry tremendous guilt with me when it comes to my son. Not just the survival guilt which any therapist would identify from a mile away, but guilt that I didn't do enough for him when we missed all the signs leading up to the discovery of this tumor, and guilt that I overcompensate now, being hyper-vigilant so that I won't miss anything again. And I have guilt that he goes to Camp Simcha despite knowing how crucial it has been in his healing. There's guilt in the pictures I see of him smiling, guilt that he can smile, and guilt that I can't send him away to a regular camp – not yet, not now – and guilt that he is getting better.
Why do I send my son to Camp Simcha? Because as crushing as my insecurities, my guilt, sometimes become, I can't let my son be a victim of it. Camp Simcha gives my son two weeks of joy and gives us two weeks to remember that he deserves it. That his days that I carefully measure in appointments and symptoms are far better spent in shaving cream fights and late-night dodgeball games. Much better spent on hammocks between trees, on boats, on ziplines, and on the shoulders of magical counselors who love him as fiercely as we do. Much better spent as an actual 11-year-old.
Somewhere between closing the metaphorical door of any traumatic situation and getting sucked into the constant vortex of pain and victimhood, there's a middle place of relative contentment. Of just understanding that it is what it is. You can't keep defaulting to the worst case scenario or you'll go crazy but you also can't ever really close the door. I'm not sure if I found that sweet spot yet, but maybe I'm getting a little closer to it. Initially, sending him to Simcha made me think that I was placing my son squarely in the shadow of my fears and ensuring that he would forever be carrying the victim card. Instead, it was the complete opposite. It freed him of it. Because as much as I thought I knew what Camp Simcha was about, I realized that first year that I really knew nothing. And as much as my friends who ask me why I send my son there think they know what it's about, they can't possibly ever understand.
And hopefully, they never will.


text:
package org.apache.taverna.biocatalogue.model.search;

import org.apache.taverna.biocatalogue.model.Resource;

/**
 * Implementations of this interface will keep track of
 * current search instances for different resource types
 * (under assumption that {@link SearchInstance} classes
 * can only deal with one resource type per instance).
 *
 * In the BioCatalogue plugin it is one of the UI components
 * that needs to keep track of active search instances. This
 * interface helps to decouple the search engine model from the
 * UI.
 *
 * @author Sergejs Aleksejevs
 */
public interface SearchInstanceTracker
{
  /**
   * Clears all records of previous search instances.
   */
  public void clearPreviousSearchInstances();

  /**
   * Registers an instance of {@link SearchInstance} class
   * as a current one for a specific resource type.
   *
   * Repeated calls to this method with the same parameter
   * should overwrite old values.
   *
   * @param searchType Resource type to associate the registered
   *                   {@link SearchInstance} with.
   */
  public void registerSearchInstance(Resource.TYPE searchType, SearchInstance searchInstance);

  /**
   * Tests if provided {@link SearchInstance} is registered as the
   * current one.
   *
   * @param searchType Resource type to perform the test for.
   * @param searchInstance {@link SearchInstance} object that is expected to be
   *                       the current search instance for the specified resource type.
   * @return true - if the provided searchInstance is indeed
   *                       currently registered as the active one for the given resouce type;

   *         false - otherwise.
   */
  public boolean isCurrentSearchInstance(Resource.TYPE searchType, SearchInstance searchInstance);

  /**
   * @param searchType
   * @return Currently active {@link SearchInstance} object for the specified resource type.
   */
  public SearchInstance getCurrentSearchInstance(Resource.TYPE searchType);
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Personalised nutrition
Food choice
Eating sustainably
Healthy eating out
Cooking and shopping
Energy balance
Addictive behaviours
Gut health and digestion
Nutrition labelling
Portion information
Claims and symbols
Sustainability labelling
Allergen labelling
What's in food
Dietary fats
Vits & mins
Bioactive compounds
Why do we process food?
How are different foods produced?
Pesticide use & regulation
Future challenges
Innovation in food
Food traceability
Microbiological hazards
Food risk communication
Safe food handling
Good hygiene practices
Understanding science
Scientific terms
Study designs
Science in the media
Bread: A nutritious staple
Bread has been part of the human diet for thirty thousand years. It provides energy in the form of carbohydrates and essential nutrients, dietary fibre and phytochemicals. Yet there are many misconceptions around bread.
Composition of bread
Bread is made from cereal grains such as wheat, rye, oats, so its nutrient content is largely determined by the content of the grains. The nutritional composition of bread depends on whether the flour used to produce the bread is white or wholemeal flour, as well as the addition of ingredients like seeds or fat.1
Table: Nutrient content of different types of breads, per 100 g*.2
Wheat bread, wholemeal
Rye bread, wholemeal
Carbohydrates, g (% of energy)
Protein, g (% of energy)
Fat, g (% of energy)
Dietary fibre, g
Vitamin B1 (Thiamine), µg
Vitamin B2 (Riboflavin), µg
Vitamin B3 (Niacin), mg
Vitamin B6 (pyridoxine), µg
Vitamin B9 (Folate), µg
Iron, mg
Zinc, mg
Magnesium, mg
Sodium (salt), g
*Varies between bakeries and countries. Check nutritional information on pre-packed product labels.
About half of our daily energy should come from carbohydrates, mainly from starch.3 Therefore, together with potatoes, pasta and rice, bread is a major component of a healthy and balanced diet. Bread also contains proteins, and only small amounts of fat (unless added during production).1
Cereal grains are rich in dietary fibre and provide essential micronutrients, including B vitamins (e.g. thiamin, niacin and folate) and minerals (e.g. iron, zinc and magnesium), mostly located in the bran, the outer layer of the grain. The amount of these components in bread depends on the flour (see Table); wholemeal flour is richer than white flour. Therefore, wholemeal breads not only contain more fibre, but also more vitamins and minerals (unless these are added back to white flour after milling, as is the case in the UK for example).1
Around two thirds of the fibre in cereal grains is insoluble and a third soluble; when the bran is removed, mainly insoluble fibre is lost. Fibre is associated with several health benefits, in particular improved gut health and bowel function, but also reduced risk of coronary heart disease and type 2 diabetes and improved weight maintenance.1,3
Contribution to Europeans' diets
On average, EU citizens consume 50 kg of bread per person per year, or around 137 g per day (3-4 slices of white bread). However, consumption varies: German and Austrian citizens consume the most (80 kg per person per year) and people in Ireland and the UK the least (less than 50 kg).4 A slow but steady decline in bread consumption is observed in the UK and Germany (1-2% per year).4
Consumer misconceptions towards bread
An increasingly common belief is that starchy foods, including bread, cause weight gain. This belief stems from an increasing popularity of high-protein/low carbohydrate diets which are often successful for short-term weight loss. However, it is the overall lower energy intake, rather than the avoidance of carbohydrates per se, that leads to weight loss.5 A recent comprehensive review found that whole grain (such as wholemeal) bread consumption was not associated with weight gain. This study also found an association between dietary patterns including refined bread and excess abdominal fat (although consumption of mainly white bread could reflect an overall less healthy diet).6
Another common misconception is that bread causes bloating. In healthy people, there is no scientific evidence to support this.7 However, in conditions like coeliac disease or wheat allergy, consumption of bread (and other foods containing gluten or wheat) can lead to gastrointestinal damage and discomfort. The proportion of people who perceive they are allergic to wheat (and other foods) is higher than the actual prevalence.7 If an allergy or intolerance is suspected, it is important to seek medical advice and be tested. Simply cutting out foods can lead to lower intakes of essential nutrients.8
Improving the nutritional quality of breads
Bread also contains salt, which is added for taste and various functional properties. Salt is important for dough handling, taste, texture and shelf-life. As a staple food in most European countries, bread is therefore one of the main contributors to total salt intake.9,10 There are initiatives to reduce salt levels in bread across several European countries, ranging from a 10-15% reduction target in Austria and Italy, and up to 30% in Croatia.9
Other product innovations have contributed to improved nutritional profiles of bread, such as the addition of fibre, whole grains, seeds and omega 3 fatty acids, and these innovations are expected to continue.4
O'Connor A (2012). An overview of the role of bread in the UK diet. Nutrition Bulletin 37:193-212.
DGExpert, Version 1.2.15.1, German Nutrition Society 2013.
European Food Safety Authority (2010). Scientific Opinion on Dietary Reference Values for carbohydrates and dietary fibre. EFSA Journal 8(3):1462.
The Federation of Bakers website, The Bread Industry, Industry Facts, European Bread Market.
O'Connor A (2012). Bread consumption in the UK: what are the main attitudinal factors affecting current intake and its place in a healthy diet? Nutrition Bulletin 37:368-379.
Bautista-Castaño I & Serra-Majem L (2012). Relationship between bread consumption, body weight, and abdominal fat distribution: evidence from eidemiological studies. Nutrition Reviews 70:218-233.
Weichselbaum E (2012). Does bread cause bloating? Nutrition Bulletin 37:30-36.
Ohlund K, et al. (2010). Dietary shortcomings in children on a gluten-free diet. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics 23(3):294-300.
World Health Organization (2013).Mapping salt reduction initiatives in the WHO European Region. Copenhagen, Denmark.
Belz MCE, Ryan LAM, Arendt EK (2012). The impact of salt reduction in bread: a review. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 52:514-524.
Fruit and Vegetable Consumption in Europe
What are Food Supplements and Who Needs Them?
Skipping breakfast may increase food intake at lunchtime
Interested in our quarterly newsletter?
Childhood obesity (Infographic)
Farmed fish: A healthy and sustainable choice?
What's in food?
About EUFIC
Work at EUFIC
Food facts for healthy choices
EUFIC is a non-profit organisation that provides clear, practical information on food and health, based on sound science. We believe in a world where people choose to live healthily because they know how to.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
er et af Tokyos 23. bydistrikter. På engelsk kalder Shinagawa sig selv for Shinagawa City.

Anno 2008 havde bydistriktet et befolkningstal på 344.461 og en befolkningstæthed på 15.740 personer per km2. Det totale areal var på 22.72 km2.

Geografi
Shinagawa inkluderer naturlige bakker og lavt landt og desuden inddæmmet land. Bakkerne er øst for Musashino. De inkluderer Shiba Shiroganedai nord for Meguro-floden, Megurodai mellem Meguro-floden og Tachiai-floden, og Ebaradai syd for Tachiai-floden.

Distriktet ligger ud til Tokyo Bugt. Shinagawa grænser op til bydistrikterne: Koutou i øst, Minato i nord, Meguro i vest og Oota i syd.

Bydistriktet kan underinddeles i fem distrikter:
 Shinagawa-distriktet, inklusive den tidligere Shinagawa post-by på Tōkaidō
 Oosaki-distriktet, tidligere en by, som strækker sig fra Oosaki Station til Gotanda og Meguro stationer
 Ebara-distriktet district, tidligere en by med samme navn
 Ōi-distriktet, tidligere en by
 Yashio-distriktet, bestående af inddæmmet land

Historie
Det meste af Tokyo øst for Tokyos kejserpalads er inddæmmet land. En betydelig del af inddæmningen foregik under Edo-perioden. Efter Meiji-perioden og afskaffelsen af han-systemet blev Shinagawa-præfekturet etableret i 1869. Præfektur-administrationen skulle efter planen lige i nutidens Shinagawa i Ebara-distriktet. I 1871 blev Shinagawa-præfekturet integreret i Tokyo-præfekturet.

Bydistritket er etableret 15. marts 1947, ved sammenlægning af det tidligere Ebara-distrikt med det tidligere Shinagawa-distrikt. Både Ebara-distriktet og Shinagawa-distriktet blev etableret i 1932, med udvidelsen af Tokyo Citys grænser..

I Edo-perioden var Shinagawa den første by rejsede ville passere på Tōkaidō-hovedvejen efter at have forladt Nihonbashi på vej fra Edo til Kyoto. Post-by-funktionen eksisterer den dag i dag, med mange store hoteller og i alt 6.000 hotelværelser er det den tætteste koncentration i Tokyo. Tokugawa-shogunatet vedligeholdte Suzugamori henrettelsesplads i Shinagawa.

Tōkaidō Shinkansen fik stop på Shinagawa Station i 2003.

Økonomi

Hovedsæder

Flere virksomheder har hovedsæde i Shinagawa. Isuzu, en køretøjsfabrikant; JTB Corporation, et betydeligt rejsebureau; MOS Burger (i ThinkPark Tower, Oosaki); Lawson (østlige tårn i Gate City Ohsaki i Oosaki), Namco Bandai Holdings; Namco Bandai Games; Banpresto; Rakuten, Hondas luksusmærke Acura; NSK Ltd.; Imagica;Marza Animation Planet; og Pola Cosmetics er alle virksomheder der har hovedsæde i Shinagawa.

Japan Airlines (JAL) og dets datterselskabJAL Hotels har hovedsæde i Shinagawa. JAL Express og JALways har kontorer på Tennōzu-øen. Desuden har Jalux hovedsæde i I·S Building. JAL-datterselskabet Japan Asia Airways har også hovedsæde i JAL Building.

GEOS en engelsk sprogskole-virksomhed havde tidligere hovedsæde i Shinagawa. Tidligere havde Air Nippon også hovedsæde i Shinagawa.

Øvrige kontorer
Andre virksomheder der driver afdelingskontorer eller forskningsfaciliteter i Shinagawa omfatter: Sony driver Gotenyama Technology Center og Osaki East Technology Center i Shinagawa. Sony havde tidligere hovedsæde i Shinagawa. Sony flyttede til Minato i slutningen af 2006 og lukkede Osaki West Technology Center i Shinagawa omkring 2007. Adobe Systems driver sin Japan-afdeling på 19. sal i Gate City Ohsaki nær Oosaki Station, mens Siemens AG har Japan-kontorer i Takanawa Park Tower. Phoenix Technologies driver sit Japan-kontor på 7. sal af Gotanda NN Building i Gotanda. Siemens Japan og Philips har også kontorer i Shinagawa.
Microsoft og ExxonMobil har deres Japan-hovedkvarterer i Konan, Minato, nær Shinagawa.

Steder
 Institut for lykkeforskning
 National Institute of Japanese Literature
 Suzugamori henrettelsesplads (Edo-perioden)
 TV Tokyo Tennozu Studios

Uddannelse

Universiteter
 Hoshi University
 Rissho University
 Seisen University
 Showa University
 Sugino Women's University

Venskabsbyrelationer
Shinagawa har venskabsbyrelationer med Auckland i New Zealand, Geneve i Schweiz, Portland, Maine i USA.
  Geneve, Schweiz
  Auckland, New Zealand
  Harbin, Kina
  Hayakawa, Japan
  Portland, Maine

Kilder

Eksterne henvisninger

 Shinagawa City  official website in English
 Shinagawa City (Japanese)

Bydistrikter i Tokyo

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Protoanemonina (de vegades anomenada anemonol o ranunculol) és una toxina que es troba en totes les plantes de la família Ranunculàcia. En maceració, per exemple, quan és ferida la planta, és produïda per un procés enzimàtic des del glicòsid ranunculina. És la lactona d'àcid, 4-pentadienòic 4-hidroxi-2.

Una planta ferida allibera la substància, causant picor, erupcions o butllofes al contacte amb la pell o mucosa. Ingerir plantes fresques de la família Ranunculàcia pot conduir a nàusees, vòmits, marejos, espasmes o paràlisi.

Quan s'asseca la planta, la protoanemonina entra en contacte amb l'aire i dimeritza l'anemonina, que és hidrolitzada a un àcid carboxílic no-tòxic.

Referències

Toxines
Compostos aromàtics


The Future of Heating Oil in Massachusetts…Is Here!
As of July 1, 2014, the sulfur content in heating oil will be reduced to 500 parts per million (ppm). The de-sulfurization down to 500 ppm, also referred to as low sulfur heating oil, is nothing new. Diesel fuel went through this process twice a number of years ago. The first reduction of sulfur in diesel fuel in the 1990s … Continue reading The Future of Heating Oil in Massachusetts…Is Here!
Effective July 31, 2013, the state of Massachusetts is increasing the excise rates on gasoline and on-road diesel fuel. There will be a three cent increase on these fuels, taking the excise tax from $0.21 per gallon to $0.24 per gallon.


text:
Prepared Fresh Daily Since 1983
SE Corner of Shaw and Marks • Dine-in/Take Out
Location / Contact Us
Marian's Mexican restaurant has enjoyed serving fresh authentic Mexican dishes to central valley residents for nearly three decades. Originating as Adrian's, the restaurant opened the dine-in establishment at the corner of Shaw and Marks in 1983. Since that time, the restaurant has remained family owned and operated and boasts the same traditional recipes that attracted families, friends, colleagues and visitors from the outset.
While we hope that all of our customers enjoy the traditional recipes and the casual atmosphere, the one constant which we are most proud of is the freshness. The ownership has always maintained a commitment to using the freshest vegetables, healthiest meats and all-natural recipes. We believe that commitment to freshness and quality, above all else, has helped keep us in business for nearly 30 years.
Upholding this standard does not come without sacrifices; our committed cooks arrive each morning around 6am to begin chopping vegetables, dicing meats, shredding cheese, and grinding spices. This process continues throughout the day to ensure that all our entrees are being served fresh to our customers daily.
By mid-morning the scent of fresh diced cilantro spills out of our kitchen as the days batch of fresh salsas are made. While the recipe – our proudest – is safeguarded by our kitchen staff, we can share that we only use the freshest jalapenos and onions, the ripest tomatoes and fine ground spices.
We understand the value of health to our customers and our environment. With that in mind, we chose not to settle for the saturated unnatural fats in which most of our competitors fry their tortilla chips. After two years of research and testing, we have perfected a tortilla chip recipe, using super thin white corn tortillas and crisping them golden in a 100% pure vegetable oil.
We've also taken a serious approach to developing a more sustainable operation. Our print media uses 100% recycled leaf – paper, soy – based inks. We are developing a program which will lead to a 'greener' operation – from increasing the efficiency of our water usage through to the implementation of recycling program that diverts 75% of our recyclable waste content from landfills.
In summary we feel that our commitment to freshness and maintaining a family operation are the values which will ensure that we serve quality and authentic dishes for another 25 years.
Visit our Gallery View our Menu
Marian's Mexican Restaurant
2767 W. Shaw Ave #103 Fresno, CA 93711
mariansmex@sbcglobal.net
© Marian's Mexican Restaurant 2021
© Marian's Mexican Restaurant. All Rights Reserved.


text:
China sets example in fighting virus
Epidemic reveals inadequacies in global governance; Beijing says it's ready to help. China's response to novel coronavirus pneumonia has set an example for the world in coping with the contagion and offered experience in advancing global public health governance, officials and experts said. The COVID-19 outbreak has also raised the alarm about global public health […]
Ann Asianews Network
View all posts by Ann Asianews Network →
Workers disinfect a market in Wuhan, Hubei province, on Sunday.
Epidemic reveals inadequacies in global governance; Beijing says it's ready to help.
China's response to novel coronavirus pneumonia has set an example for the world in coping with the contagion and offered experience in advancing global public health governance, officials and experts said.
The COVID-19 outbreak has also raised the alarm about global public health security and reminded countries that co-operation and co-ordination are needed to deal with challenges as infectious diseases can rapidly escalate into global emergencies, they said.
There is a growing positive momentum in epidemic control nationwide thanks to the "comprehensive, thorough and rigorous" measures that China has taken to contain the virus, they said, noting that the daily number of new confirmed cases outside Hubei province has been declining for weeks.
President Xi Jinping has said on several occasions that China's efforts to curb the spread of the contagion not only aim to protect the safety and health of the Chinese people but also to contribute to global public health.
Calling public health emergencies a challenge for all countries, Xi called for international co-operation in upholding public health security to address the threats that mankind is facing.
With the virus spreading rapidly in other countries, the World Health Organization increased its assessment of the epidemic's risk from high to "very high" globally on Feb 28. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on March 2 that the spread of COVID-19 in South Korea, Italy, Iran and Japan has become the greatest concern.
The outbreak has revealed inadequacies in global public health governance and highlighted the urgent need to buttress the system, State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in a signed article published on March 1 by Qiushi Journal, flagship magazine of the Communist Party of China Central Committee.
"China is ready to work with the international community to address these challenges," Wang said.
"We support the core role of the United Nations and the WHO in responding to health emergencies and in improving the global public health governance system," he said.
He said that public health issues should be moved up on the international agenda, and major international health projects should be implemented, and a health Silk Road taken up.
As the outbreak becomes a global emergency, experts warned that the disease can cause panic, disrupt economies, undermine political authority, spark discrimination and expose societal fault lines.
Getting the outbreak under control requires effective national and global governance across many areas-from detecting cases to countering misinformation, from scientific research to minimising trade and travel restrictions, they said.
Suerie Moon, director of research at the Global Health Centre of the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, Switzerland, said the international system has been strengthened considerably since the 2014 West African Ebola crisis, but it is still "thin and fragile".
"For example, we have no reliable system for financing the WHO or other international efforts that need to surge in times of crisis," Moon said in an email interview. "Three weeks ago, the WHO asked for $675 million to support its own work and help countries with weaker health systems, but this target has still not been met."
Moon said the world needs stronger and more resilient global governance to deal with outbreaks, adding that as a major global player, China has both the potential and the capacity to play a larger role in global governance processes affecting health.
"It can contribute financially today, for example, to global efforts to contain coronavirus in lower income countries, through the WHO or other bodies. It can contribute diplomatically in efforts to spearhead and negotiate fair, effective international rules on data sharing in emergencies, or pathogen and benefit-sharing.
"It can also encourage research collaboration with scientists from around the world, and identify ways of ensuring that new technologies developed to address outbreaks are available globally at an affordable price and in adequate volumes."
China announced on Saturday a donation of $20 million to the WHO. The Chinese government's decision aims to assist the WHO to bring its professional advantages into full play and work as a better co-ordinator in global efforts to combat the epidemic, Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said on Monday.
Unprecedented response
Praising China's measures to contain the epidemic, WHO Director-General Tedros said, "In many ways, China is setting a new standard for outbreak response." He made the remark at a news conference in Geneva after a visit to China in February.
The Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on COVID-19 released on Feb 29 credited the Chinese effort to combat the virus, stating, "China has rolled out perhaps the most ambitious, agile and aggressive disease containment effort in history."
Moon said a key message from China's experience is that it is possible to contain the virus's spread with a rigorous approach-an important message for government officials in other countries. "It is indeed encouraging that the number of new cases being reported from China has been decreasing-I do hope this trend continues," she added.
Robert Lawrence Kuhn, an international corporate strategist, said in an article published on the website of China Global Television Network that China's mobilisation after the outbreak is unprecedented in global health history. "Nowhere could it work like it works in China. And the reason it works relates to how the Party system works," Kuhn said.
Future historians may well look upon China's fight against the coronavirus as a turning point in worldwide efforts to contain outbreaks of new diseases and stop their spread, which globalisation and ubiquitous air travel have made vital, he said.
Since the start of the outbreak, leaders of more than 170 countries and over 40 international and regional organisations have extended their sympathies to the nation over the outbreak, commended China's efforts to fight the virus in an open, transparent and responsible manner, and voiced their support for China in the battle against the contagion.
International and regional cooperation should be expanded and good communication with the WHO and experience sharing among countries should be continued, Xi said at a recent meeting on epidemic control. He added that China will shoulder its responsibilities as a major country and provide necessary assistance to countries affected by COVID-19.
Ren Lin, a senior researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences' Institute of World Economics and Politics, said that co-operation is the best choice for countries to cope with the challenges posed by the epidemic.
The outbreak provides an opportunity for countries to reconsider the need to improve global governance in public health by enhancing cooperation and strengthening emergency response and risk prevention capacity, Ren said.
In terms of the priorities for international cooperation, Moon said all countries should share detailed and complete information with the WHO and other countries as quickly as possible as "there is still so much we don't understand about this virus".
She also called for pooling and sharing resources across countries, whether that is scarce supplies such as masks or other personal protective equipment for health workers, or mobilising funds in countries that will struggle to do so domestically.
Previous Previous post: Shortage of Masks, Handwash due to panic- buying: Leave some for everyone
Next Next post: Social media curbs removed in Jammu and Kashmir after seven months


According to a recent report from Nielsen, 68% of the consumers interviewed reported that they used apps while they were "bored" or "killing time" while 70% of app downloaders who own a smartphone said they used apps while alone or by themselves.
In this blog post, Matt Collins, Global Director of Applications and Partner Marketing at MEF Member Microsoft, explains how to take advantage of these key driving forces behind app usage – loneliness and boredom.
When I first saw last week's report that shows we download apps most of all when we're bored and lonely, I felt despair. How unfortunate to think that the cumulative effect of entrepreneurial creativity, hard work, and risk is a battle for a consumer with nothing better to do.
After a couple of days and, thanks to Halloween, enough Milk Duds to induce lockjaw, I've come around. Competing with the stuff that vies for our idle time is a blessing.
First, it puts apps in a lucrative, albeit crowded category of alternatives for those with a surplus of time.
I bet M&M-Mars, Frito Lay, and Coca-Cola have shelves full of research studies about their product categories that read a lot like Nielsen's. Nearly every reality TV show comes into existence not for the enrichment of its viewers, but to simply keep televisions in the "on" position. It's hard to imagine that moviegoers trudged to the theaters to watch the six (six!) Police Academy sequels for any other reason than pure grade, triple distilled boredom.
Killing time must be a hundred billion dollar sector of the economy. That smells like a golden mobile opportunity.
Armed with the certainty that customers use apps while waiting for something else to happen empowers app developers and mobile marketers to change the way they engage the market.
Second, when we're bored, rational thinking evaporates and emotions take over.
When we're bored, we respond to stimuli that promise the most modest of improvements to our condition. When I marketed video games, I learned right away that it was a lot more productive (and fun) to market the things kids wanted, not the things they needed. After all, no one needs a video game.
Armed with the certainty that customers use apps while waiting for something else to happen empowers app developers and mobile marketers to change the way they engage the market. The pitch you gave your investors highlighting your innovation, technology, and development team probably won't convince the dull minded to download your creation.
How did you and your team feel the first time you got the app to work as you had planned?
How will users feel when they do that?
If your users were going to tell a friend about your app, what words would you hope they use?
Recognizing that pictures tell a thousand words, can you capture screenshots that are likely to evoke this response?
Third, mobile devices give your boredom killer a built-in advantage.
If you haven't noticed, mobile is all the rage these days. All the non-mobile companies I mentioned earlier would love to figure out how to bring their solutions to life on the billion or so smartphones into the world. Until someone invents a Star Trek Replicator app, many will be on the outside looking in.
In other words, fighting for the sluggish is a windfall waiting to happen. That's not to say it will be easy. Nailing what makes your app awesome and finding the right words, visuals, and channels to communicate it is at least as hard as it was to put together your investor deck. You can't afford to give this exercise short shrift.
After all, you're competing against entire industries that long ago figured out that their success depends on compelling the inattentive. If you're going to win, you're going to have to play their game.
This post originally appeared on Matt's Blog, and is re-used here with permission.


One of the appeals of cash only poster printing is that you can "super size" your advertising medium. Do you want to create a big impression? Creating large posters is a great tool. Larger posters are excellent if you want potential customers to see your message from long-distance. Also, they're perfect for outdoor marketing, conventions, as well as other times where the event is larger than average.
When creating a poster design, you need to think about the size your poster. This means is finding images which aren`t only attractive, but probably represent your business or product. You will want to use images the public can begin to accompany your organization. You may also make use of your logo.
But remember, the goal would be to produce a new brand on the market. However, ensure that the image you select is still attractive when you focus. Some images may become distorted when you zoom in, while some may look menacing or scary and can frighten off the client.
Be careful, don't add more text around the big poster. Keep in mind that individuals will still walk or drive near your big poster without having to stop.
Whenever you enter a large poster, however, you can use larger fonts, this will make your text or message easier to read, what's going to become more effective. You need to be sure that the content in your posters is apparent, concise, and straightforward to keep in mind.
If the poster isn't hanging near the store or event, surely specify contact information for communication and additional information.
Additionally, it is important that the Printer could make quality work and have knowledge about posters. Ask to see examples of previous work to ensure the quality meets your expectations.
When you find a Printing Service to print posters, you have to follow their instructions exactly when sending your design. For example, a sizable print requires a large resolution for images. A little resolution may lead to uneven or blurred images. Follow all size patterns to prevent skewing and blurring ultimately result.


text:
Home > Massachusetts Banks > Boston Banks > TD Bank Boston > TD Bank, Copley Square Branch
TD Bank, Copley Square Branch
Basic Info Financial Info Routing Numbers Reviews Map More Info
Name: TD Bank, Copley Square Branch
Review: 384 client reviews
Location: 535 Boylston Street
View Other Branches
Office Hours: Sun: 11:00 to 16:00
Mon: 08:00 to 19:00
Tue: 08:00 to 19:00
Wed: 08:00 to 19:00
Thu: 08:00 to 19:00
Fri: 08:00 to 19:00
Sat: 08:00 to 15:00
Branch Deposit: $237,848,000
FDIC Cert: #18409
Established: 2007-09-10
Name: TD Bank
Concentration: All Other Specialization > 1 Billion
FDIC Insurance: 1961-07-01
Holden By: Toronto-Dominion Bank, The
Charter Class: Commercial bank, national (federal) charter and Fed member, supervised by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)
# of Branches: 1239, view all, view on map
Website: www.td.com/us/en/personal-banking
Total Assets: $311,037,541,000
Total Deposits: $266,110,553,000
Total Equity Capital: $40,027,233,000
Total Domestic Office Deposits: $266,110,553,000
Net Income: $2,026,953,000
Quarterly Net Income: $659,303,000
Return on Assets: 1%
Quarterly Return on Assets: 1%
Return on Equity: 7%
Quarterly Return on Equity: 7%
384 client reviews of TD Bank scored 2.5 out of 5.
lost my money
by jjjjjjj, Mar. 14, 2012
I have never had problems with TD before, the other day i deposited $600 and the next day I went to make a purchase, my card was denied. I called them several times before I could get someone w=on the phone who could speak clear english. Then they left me on hold for an hour and never came back. Called back and the same guy answered and the same thing happened. It has now been over 48 hours and I am still having trouble trying to communicate with the bank and STILL don't have my money!!
* this reviewer has be with this bank for 6 months - 1 year
* this reviewer had 1 - 2 banks before.
* this review was made on TD Bank, Boylston Street Branch at Boston, MA
3 of 3 people found this review helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes, No Report Abuse
0 comment. Add a comment
All Reviews...
Banks Nearby
Santander Bank, N.A., Back Bay Branch (0.1 miles)
Boston Private Bank & Trust Company, Back Bay Branch (0.1 miles)
ETHIC, Ethic (0.1 miles)
Webster Bank, Copley Square Branch (0.1 miles)
Citizens Bank, Copley Square Branch (0.1 miles)


Exchange Traded Funds are and have been the fastest growing asset class for over a decade. Users of this product have benefited from its cost effectiveness and ease of use, and have leveraged on the access it provides to baskets of shares for portfolio diversification.
The listing structure of the Exchange allows for quick and efficient listing of ETFs and other ETPs by local or foreign issuer alike. The also NSE operates an efficient and transparent market centered on maximizing value for investors and issuers. Please see Rules for Listing ETFs here.
Access Access to a wide range of institutional, retail, local and international investors.
Visibility Access to an enhanced transparent, efficient and orderly secondary market trading, thereby benefitting from greater visibility and increased liquidity. Your ETF also benefits from via the activities of trading information vendors.
Investors Awareness and Confidence Increased awareness and product knowledge raises the confidence of investors and improves the marketability and recognition of the ETF.


pick up the tickets at a convenience store in Japan.
This is New! U20 Tickets Now Available!
*Orders are accepted at Japan Arts Pia Call Center only.
except in the case of cancellation of the performance.
*Program are subject to change without prior notice.
*Cancellation or date/seat change requests are NOT allowed for any reason (except for the cancellation of concert) after purchase of ticket(s).
*Children under five will not be admitted.
*Photography and all types of recordings and usage of mobile phones are strictly prohibited in the hall.
** All seats are reserved except the unreserved seats of June 10. Please be seated in your assigned seat.
*Resale of tickets via internet auction etc. is not permitted, as problems can result.


Brasch to be Sworn January 5th.
District 16 Senator-elect Lydia Brasch will officially become a Nebraska State Senator tomorrow! Nebraska's 102nd State Legislature will commence Wednesday January 5, 2010 with a swearing in ceremony beginning at 10:00 am. Watch live video streaming of the swearing-in ceremony HERE.


Harold Godwineson, the Last Anglo-Saxon King, owed everything to his father. Who was this Godwine, first Earl of Wessex and known as the Kingmaker? Was he an unscrupulous schemer, using King and Witan to gain power? Or was he the greatest of all Saxon Earls, protector of the English against the hated Normans? We follow Godwine from his obscure beginnings as he was befriended by the Danes, favored by Canute the Great, given an Earldom and raised to the highest level of society. He sired nine children, among them four Earls, a Queen and a future King. Along with his power came a struggle to keep his enemies at bay, and Godwine's best efforts were brought down by the misdeeds of his eldest son Swegn. Although he became father-in-law to a reluctant Edward the Confessor, his fortunes dwindled as the Normans gained prominence at court. Driven into exile, Godwine regathered his forces and came back even stronger, only to discover that his second son Harold was destined to surpass him in renown and glory.


Time has gone such a way that i thought i should also note down my thoughts.
softwares started correcting english and maths and you need not worry on your past being failed in both.
Today my time was in bangalore and let me write about it.
Such a beautiful city created by its guests being hosted this city. i have been and i am a guest here today and was hosting it as well for few years earlier.
this is a city that was created by its visitors and the town is yet to know the amount of trouble that it is gonna get into by welcoming more.
visitors are over-ruling and the localities are still being the servants. I believe that its time for us to educate and contribute to the state and to the people.
i am sure people are familiar to the traffic of bangalore; and why is it?. coz somebody dint know the math of game plan or dint think the ignorants would make their way out without paying the cost . and who are THE IGNORANTS?
let me get back with facts.


text:
Minnesota's Least Vaccinated County is in Central MN
Laura Bradshaw Published: June 28, 2021
Alex Wong/Getty Images
This COVID vaccine has been a bit of a controversial topic, much like the virus was during quarantine, lockdowns and every other "safety" protocol that was implemented. This pandemic has become political in this country, more than other countries for some reason. And this divide continues into the era of a vaccine for the virus. Now, there is some sort of variant that has become a topic of conversation and division again.
Looking at a map of the state of Minnesota, you can see who has been vaccinated and who hasn't been according to population. It's in interactive map, and you can just click on a county and see how many people are vaccinated. From looking at this, it does seem like the people willing to get the vaccination depends on where you live. The amount of people vaccinated in each county shows that people are generally like minded by region. Like whatever your neighbors are doing, you are doing as well. This is obviously a generalization, but if you look at the map, it does seem so.
The county with the least amount of people vaccinated is Todd county. That is where Long Prairie is located. Benton county, closer to St. Cloud is also on the low end of the list. The Twin Cities area has the most vaccinated people along with Cook county which is in Northern Minnesota.
The reasons I've heard from people not wanting to get the vaccine vary from "I don't know what's in it" to "people are dying after getting the vaccine" to "it doesn't keep you from getting COVID, so what's the point". The third one is definitely true, but no one said it would prevent you from getting COVID. It's supposed to make it less lethal, your symptoms should not be as severe. But there is definitely still a chance of contracting the virus.
If you are not getting the vaccine, what would change your mind?
Categories: Baxter's Morning Side Show, Health, Loon Morning Show, Minnesota


text:
Justine Goodman
Writer, Editor, Digital Content Strategist
Refinery29 Clips
Maxim Clips
PopEater: Spring Break, Celebrity-Style
The month of March is upon us, which means the booze-soaked collegiate tradition known as spring break is about to commence. But while America's future leaders are getting their stomachs pumped in Cancun, the rich and famous prefer to vacation in more luxurious, refined destinations — from the world's most exotic beaches to its most glistening ski slopes. When it comes to your own spring break, which of those groups would you rather belong to? We thought so. Relax, renew and rejuvenate like the stars at these top destinations, which are commonly frequented by your favorite celebrities … plus people like Lindsay Lohan. And if, like us, you can't afford an elaborate spring break this year, at least you'll have a better idea of what you're missing when you cry yourself to sleep at night.
The island of St. Barts, located in the beautiful French Caribbean, is a favorite for a wide variety of celebs, from Nick Cannon and Mariah Carey to Fergie and husband Josh Duhamel, who vacationed there earlier this year. In November 2010, Tara Reid made the gossip mags for getting sloppy at a St. Barts club. (Although, to be fair, the only thing less newsworthy than Reid getting sloppy at a club is the actress "accidentally" showing her nipples.) Last winter, the island also played host to Lindsay and Ali Lohan. Luckily for local residents, the 'Mean Girls' actress didn't try to steal the island and then claim it was "on loan."
What could be sexier (or more likely to earn you a punch in the face) than telling your friends and co-workers you're jetting to this French Polynesian island for some R&R? A-list stars who have been known to soak up the sun in Bora Bora include Charlize Theron, Nicole Kidman, who honeymooned at the St. Regis hotel with husband Keith Urban, and Adam Lambert, who was spotted jet skiing the afternoon away just last week. Far more important, however, is that Charlie Sheen has vacationed here, and if the last few weeks have taught us anything, it's that we're willing to follow him anywhere — be it a tropical island oasis or the depths of hell.
For a truly exotic getaway, big-name stars like Kevin Spacey, Madonna, Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes and David and Victoria Beckham travel halfway around the globe to the Maldives, which, in addition to its pristine beaches on the Indian Ocean, boasts some of the most luxurious digs on the planet.
Jay-Z and Beyonce have been known to cruise around on a chartered yacht, while Katy Perry and Russell Brand recently spent their honeymoon resort-hopping across the islands — which is totally next on our to-do list … you know, right after "stop being poor."
Not a fan of skin cancer? Then maybe you'd rather hit the slopes than the beach. In that case, head to Aspen, Colo., where the beautiful people go for top-notch skiing and snowboarding. Recent visitors to the area include Chris O'Donnell and family, Kurt Russell and Goldie Hawn, Elle Macpherson and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Thankfully, the Governator has a better command of the slopes than the English language.
Composed of a cluster of islands located in the South Pacific, Fiji attracts many celebrities thanks to its secluded, largely paparazzi-free location. Oh, and also its insanely lavish resorts. Notable visitors to the islands include Oprah, Britney Spears, Bill Gates, Pierce Brosnan and Jessica Simpson. Mel Gibson is also a longtime regular, but don't let that deter you; he'll only be thought of as a lunatic bigot for a few more months, after which he'll be remembered as the guy who starred in 'The Beaver.'
President Obama's not the only reason everyone — well, democrats — loves Hawaii. Celebs are also partial to the 50th state because of its close proximity to Los Angeles, with many even opting to buy second (or third or fourth) homes there. Oprah has a tricked out mansion in Maui, while Ben Stiller and Drew Barrymore reportedly own homes in Kauai. Stars who don't own, like Britney Spears and Denise Richards, often choose to stay at the Four Seasons Maui, one of the island's most well-appointed properties. Other celebs who are often "spotted" (i.e., hounded by paparazzi) in Hawaii include Owen Wilson, Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner, Kate Hudson and Woody Harrelson.
or celebs based on the East Coast, this majestic island in the British West Indies is just a hop, skip and a jump from JFK Airport (or technically, a short flight to St. Martin followed by a short boat ride to Anguilla proper). With 33 flawless beaches and an array of world-class resorts, it's no surprise that stars as big as Brad Pitt, Robert DeNiro and Denzel Washington have been spotted frolicking on the beach. Except maybe DeNiro, who has never frolicked anywhere, ever.
(A version of this article was originally published on PopEater.)
Posted in: Celebrity, Gossip, Holidays, Humor & Comedy, Travel | Tagged: PopEater, Spring Break, vacations
Time Out New York: Style Passport – Israel
PopEater: Best Celebrity Feuds
View justine.goodman's profile on Facebook
View justine_goodman's profile on Twitter
View justine_goodman's profile on Instagram
View justine-goodman-7b355ab's profile on LinkedIn
Really exerting myself on this Christmas hike🎄
Happy birthday to the best guy I know @davestangle 💕
A few weeks ago I got to do a really cool thing in California with @mercedesbenzusa + @glamourmag. Read the story on @stylecaster. Link in bio... (📷: @cierramillerr) . . . . . #mercedesbenz #atthetrack #worldsfastestfamily #glamourWOTY
Work wife + coach's wife 🏈 . . . . . #blogher19 #fridaynightlights #cleareyesfullheartscantlose #tamitaylor
And I couldn't help but wonder...am I friends with @sarahjessicaparker now, or are we BEST friends? #blogher19
Cross-country Canadian roadtrip: 10/10, would highly recommend.
Interview: Jon Voight
Interview: Joel McHale
Interview: Chris O'Dowd
Interview: Ricky Gervais
Interview: Fred Armisen
Interview: Andy Samberg


Fill out the form below and one of our Power BI sales team members will contact you.
It's a data-driven world. Stay in the know, spot trends as they happen, and push your business further. We look forward to helping you learn how you can start today with Power BI.
Fill out the form to the right and one of our team members will call you within three business days. We'll discuss your specific needs and how Power BI can empower you and your stakeholders to gain insights that help you achieve your goals.