|
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On Apr 30, 5:53*pm, Garrison Hilliard wrote:
Web Produced By: Megan Wasmund Email: Last Update: 5:18 pm * (Shannon Kettler, 9News) The woman who tried to help a man that fell into the Little Miami River Wednesday is facing charges. Cherie Moore is charged with operating a watercraft while under the influence. Moore was cited and released from police custody. Police say Dwayne Cottrell, 43, slipped into the river as he, another man and Moore were trying to launch a canoe from the riverbank. When the two people tried to pull Cottrell to safety, the boat capsized throwing all of the people into the water. The man and Moore made it to shore, but Cottrell never resurfaced. Police say none of the people were wearing life jackets. http://www.wcpo.com/news/local/story...r-Deadly-Canoe... It was significant that they explicated that they were NOT wearing their PFDs! John Kuthe... |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:09:44 -0700 (PDT), John Kuthe
wrote: On Apr 30, 5:53*pm, Garrison Hilliard wrote: Web Produced By: Megan Wasmund Email: Last Update: 5:18 pm * (Shannon Kettler, 9News) The woman who tried to help a man that fell into the Little Miami River Wednesday is facing charges. Cherie Moore is charged with operating a watercraft while under the influence. Moore was cited and released from police custody. Police say Dwayne Cottrell, 43, slipped into the river as he, another man and Moore were trying to launch a canoe from the riverbank. When the two people tried to pull Cottrell to safety, the boat capsized throwing all of the people into the water. The man and Moore made it to shore, but Cottrell never resurfaced. Police say none of the people were wearing life jackets. http://www.wcpo.com/news/local/story...r-Deadly-Canoe... It was significant that they explicated that they were NOT wearing their PFDs! John Kuthe... not really. Typical sheep herder think. |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 2, 8:00*am, nothermark wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:09:44 -0700 (PDT), John Kuthe wrote: On Apr 30, 5:53*pm, Garrison Hilliard wrote: Web Produced By: Megan Wasmund Email: Last Update: 5:18 pm * (Shannon Kettler, 9News) The woman who tried to help a man that fell into the Little Miami River Wednesday is facing charges. Cherie Moore is charged with operating a watercraft while under the influence. Moore was cited and released from police custody. Police say Dwayne Cottrell, 43, slipped into the river as he, another man and Moore were trying to launch a canoe from the riverbank. When the two people tried to pull Cottrell to safety, the boat capsized throwing all of the people into the water. The man and Moore made it to shore, but Cottrell never resurfaced. Police say none of the people were wearing life jackets. http://www.wcpo.com/news/local/story...r-Deadly-Canoe.... It was significant that they explicated *that they were NOT wearing their PFDs! John Kuthe... not really. *Typical sheep herder think. Here on Missouri (Saint louis specifically) our local news hardly ever reports of the victims of boating accidents were wearing their PFDs. And we not only live at the confluence of two largest rivers in North Maerica (Mississippi and Missouri) but also have many many smaller fla****er rivers (Ozark streams) plus a lot of lakes, Lake Of The Ozarks being the most notable. Our local news reports many boating accidents especially inb Summer, but they never bother to report on PFD useage. :-( :-( :-( John Kuthe... |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On Sat, 2 May 2009 07:35:50 -0700 (PDT), John Kuthe
wrote: Here on Missouri (Saint louis specifically) our local news hardly ever reports of the victims of boating accidents were wearing their PFDs. And we not only live at the confluence of two largest rivers in North Maerica (Mississippi and Missouri) but also have many many smaller fla****er rivers (Ozark streams) plus a lot of lakes, Lake Of The Ozarks being the most notable. Our local news reports many boating accidents especially inb Summer, but they never bother to report on PFD useage It is pretty hard to drown while wearing one. The falls from the boat while wearing a PFD don't make news. Guy slips and gets wet is not the stuff of headlines. Where I do my boating the last couple of fatalities were night collisions. In one a cop boat plowed at high speed into an anchored boat, and killed a guy in his bunk. In another a drunk ran over a boat from behind, killed the helmsman, and kept going. They found his damaged boat, and rounded up witnesses to every one of the many drinks he had that night, and he went to prison. The cop should have. Casady Casady |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 1, 6:53*am, Garrison Hilliard wrote:
Web Produced By: Megan Wasmund Email: Last Update: 5:18 pm * (Shannon Kettler, 9News) The woman who tried to help a man that fell into the Little Miami River Wednesday is facing charges. Cherie Moore is charged with operating a watercraft while under the influence. Moore was cited and released from police custody. Curious. Does this imply that anyone (even a nonpaddling bow passenger) who is drunk in a canoe is liable for 'operating under the influence'? Do passengers on a sailboat or motorboat have the same accountability? --riverman |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
"riverman" wrote in message ... On May 1, 6:53 am, Garrison Hilliard wrote: Web Produced By: Megan Wasmund Email: Last Update: 5:18 pm (Shannon Kettler, 9News) The woman who tried to help a man that fell into the Little Miami River Wednesday is facing charges. Cherie Moore is charged with operating a watercraft while under the influence. Moore was cited and released from police custody. Curious. Does this imply that anyone (even a nonpaddling bow passenger) who is drunk in a canoe is liable for 'operating under the influence'? Do passengers on a sailboat or motorboat have the same accountability? --riverman This sounds more like "stumbling around on a muddy bank while under the influence", to me. I suppose technically, unlike a car, more than one person can be operating a canoe at any given time. I suppose that enters into what passes for the reasoning. Cricket |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 7, 7:05*am, "Cricket" wrote:
"riverman" wrote in message ... On May 1, 6:53 am, Garrison Hilliard wrote: Web Produced By: Megan Wasmund Email: Last Update: 5:18 pm (Shannon Kettler, 9News) The woman who tried to help a man that fell into the Little Miami River Wednesday is facing charges. Cherie Moore is charged with operating a watercraft while under the influence. Moore was cited and released from police custody. Curious. Does this imply that anyone (even a nonpaddling bow passenger) who is drunk in a canoe is liable for 'operating under the influence'? Do passengers on a sailboat or motorboat have the same accountability? --riverman This sounds more like "stumbling around on a muddy bank while under the influence", to me. I suppose technically, unlike a car, more than one person can be operating a canoe at any given time. *I suppose that enters into what passes for the reasoning. Cricket More than 'technically'...I think, unlike almost every other type of water- or landcraft, anyone with a paddle in their hands is operating and controlling a canoe. For that matter, I wonder if there has ever been any litigation related to whitewater rafting about the paddlers in the boat sharing some sort of 'control' of the boat. Any paddle guide knows that you can usually, but not always, accommodate for the erratic actions of a crew. A paddling crew that was horribly out of control in a dangerous situation could easily endanger themselves....why should the guide be the liable one? --riverman |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 10, 6:28*am, riverman wrote:
On May 7, 7:05*am, "Cricket" wrote: "riverman" wrote in message ... On May 1, 6:53 am, Garrison Hilliard wrote: Web Produced By: Megan Wasmund Email: Last Update: 5:18 pm (Shannon Kettler, 9News) The woman who tried to help a man that fell into the Little Miami River Wednesday is facing charges. Cherie Moore is charged with operating a watercraft while under the influence. Moore was cited and released from police custody. Curious. Does this imply that anyone (even a nonpaddling bow passenger) who is drunk in a canoe is liable for 'operating under the influence'? Do passengers on a sailboat or motorboat have the same accountability? --riverman This sounds more like "stumbling around on a muddy bank while under the influence", to me. I suppose technically, unlike a car, more than one person can be operating a canoe at any given time. *I suppose that enters into what passes for the reasoning. Cricket More than 'technically'...I think, unlike almost every other type of water- or landcraft, anyone with a paddle in their hands is operating and controlling a canoe. For that matter, I wonder if there has ever been any litigation related to whitewater rafting about the paddlers in the boat sharing some sort of 'control' of the boat. Any paddle guide knows that you can usually, but not always, accommodate for the erratic actions of a crew. A paddling crew that was horribly out of control in a dangerous situation could easily endanger themselves....why should the guide be the liable one? --riverman ummm.. because you took their money in exchange for putting them on the river? |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 10, 7:33*pm, Larry G wrote:
On May 10, 6:28*am, riverman wrote: On May 7, 7:05*am, "Cricket" wrote: "riverman" wrote in message .... On May 1, 6:53 am, Garrison Hilliard wrote: Web Produced By: Megan Wasmund Email: Last Update: 5:18 pm (Shannon Kettler, 9News) The woman who tried to help a man that fell into the Little Miami River Wednesday is facing charges. Cherie Moore is charged with operating a watercraft while under the influence. Moore was cited and released from police custody. Curious. Does this imply that anyone (even a nonpaddling bow passenger) who is drunk in a canoe is liable for 'operating under the influence'? Do passengers on a sailboat or motorboat have the same accountability? --riverman This sounds more like "stumbling around on a muddy bank while under the influence", to me. I suppose technically, unlike a car, more than one person can be operating a canoe at any given time. *I suppose that enters into what passes for the reasoning. Cricket More than 'technically'...I think, unlike almost every other type of water- or landcraft, anyone with a paddle in their hands is operating and controlling a canoe. For that matter, I wonder if there has ever been any litigation related to whitewater rafting about the paddlers in the boat sharing some sort of 'control' of the boat. Any paddle guide knows that you can usually, but not always, accommodate for the erratic actions of a crew. A paddling crew that was horribly out of control in a dangerous situation could easily endanger themselves....why should the guide be the liable one? --riverman ummm.. because you took their money in exchange for putting them on the river?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, the company took their money, but people still have self- responsibility. If a paddle crew was just so damn incompetent, or decided to have an 'extreme day' and secretly decided to sabatoge their guide by doing exactly the opposite of what he said, and an accident resulted, I think he could have grounds to sue THEM, as they were 'operating' the vehicle at the time. Unlike row rigs, where there is no uncertainty about who is in control, paddle rafts have a tremendous amount of shared control that is beyond the guide's ability to compensate for. The argument could easily be made that the river company was assuming responsibility, as the experienced party, and the guide's role assumed some training of the passengers. But in a canoe, there is not that relationship; back to the original situation....how does the legal system determine who is the 'operator' in a canoe? --riverman |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 11, 8:51*pm, riverman wrote:
On May 10, 7:33*pm, Larry G wrote: On May 10, 6:28*am, riverman wrote: On May 7, 7:05*am, "Cricket" wrote: "riverman" wrote in message ... On May 1, 6:53 am, Garrison Hilliard wrote: Web Produced By: Megan Wasmund Email: Last Update: 5:18 pm (Shannon Kettler, 9News) The woman who tried to help a man that fell into the Little Miami River Wednesday is facing charges. Cherie Moore is charged with operating a watercraft while under the influence. Moore was cited and released from police custody. Curious. Does this imply that anyone (even a nonpaddling bow passenger) who is drunk in a canoe is liable for 'operating under the influence'? Do passengers on a sailboat or motorboat have the same accountability? --riverman This sounds more like "stumbling around on a muddy bank while under the influence", to me. I suppose technically, unlike a car, more than one person can be operating a canoe at any given time. *I suppose that enters into what passes for the reasoning. Cricket More than 'technically'...I think, unlike almost every other type of water- or landcraft, anyone with a paddle in their hands is operating and controlling a canoe. For that matter, I wonder if there has ever been any litigation related to whitewater rafting about the paddlers in the boat sharing some sort of 'control' of the boat. Any paddle guide knows that you can usually, but not always, accommodate for the erratic actions of a crew. A paddling crew that was horribly out of control in a dangerous situation could easily endanger themselves....why should the guide be the liable one? --riverman ummm.. because you took their money in exchange for putting them on the river?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, the company took their money, but people still have self- responsibility. If a paddle crew was just so damn incompetent, or decided to have an 'extreme day' and secretly decided to sabatoge their guide by doing exactly the opposite of what he said, and an accident resulted, I think he could have grounds to sue THEM, as they were 'operating' the vehicle at the time. Unlike row rigs, where there is no uncertainty about who is in control, paddle rafts have a tremendous amount of shared control that is beyond the guide's ability to compensate for. The argument could easily be made that the river company was assuming responsibility, as the experienced party, and the guide's role assumed some training of the passengers. But in a canoe, there is not that relationship; back to the original situation....how does the legal system determine who is the 'operator' in a canoe? --riverman I dunno except that some lawyers know the law... like some paddlers know rivers and I'd not bet against them. I don't think I've ever heard of an outfitter suing a client but I suspect it has happened. See the deal is ..that anyone can sue for just about any reason.. and then you, as the person being sued have absolutely no choice but to defend yourself.. and having to hire a lawyer. In most liability situations.. involving rivers.. the outfitter ain't going to stay in business long at all if the word gets out that he sued a customer... right? |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 17, 7:13*am, Larry G wrote:
In most liability situations.. involving rivers.. the outfitter ain't going to stay in business long at all if the word gets out that he sued a customer... right?- LOL, agreed. But I could easily see an outfitter countersuing if the passengers or their families sued for negligence. The countersuit would be based on the passengers conspiring to put the guide (and outfitter) in danger. And it probably wouldn't deter future passengers...at least those who weren't planning on being idiots. --riverman |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 18, 9:29*am, riverman wrote:
On May 17, 7:13*am, Larry G wrote: In most liability situations.. involving rivers.. the outfitter ain't going to stay in business long at all if the word gets out that he sued a customer... right?- LOL, agreed. But I could easily see an outfitter countersuing if the passengers or their families sued for negligence. The countersuit would be based on the passengers conspiring to put the guide (and outfitter) in danger. And it probably wouldn't deter future passengers...at least those who weren't planning on being idiots. --riverman yup.... but how would you "prove" this? Wouldn't you have to have some other customers in the raft on your side? the folks suing for damages... by the way.. are not going to really care who gets nailed for the damages... just get them... and sad to say.... the outfitter/guide, more than likely is going to be held at least partially responsible... because unless you can prove ... as it "legally" prove that someone ..on-purpose tried to sabotage - as opposed to being totally stupid and uncooperative... I just don't see it succeeding... and once it's is all over... the down-in-the-weeds legal stuff is going to get forgotten when someone says ...2 years later.. that the outfitter sued the customers... that's the message that won't go away ... |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
"Larry G" wrote in message ... On May 18, 9:29 am, riverman wrote: On May 17, 7:13 am, Larry G wrote: In most liability situations.. involving rivers.. the outfitter ain't going to stay in business long at all if the word gets out that he sued a customer... right?- LOL, agreed. But I could easily see an outfitter countersuing if the passengers or their families sued for negligence. The countersuit would be based on the passengers conspiring to put the guide (and outfitter) in danger. And it probably wouldn't deter future passengers...at least those who weren't planning on being idiots. --riverman yup.... but how would you "prove" this? Wouldn't you have to have some other customers in the raft on your side? the folks suing for damages... by the way.. are not going to really care who gets nailed for the damages... just get them... and sad to say.... the outfitter/guide, more than likely is going to be held at least partially responsible... because unless you can prove ... as it "legally" prove that someone ..on-purpose tried to sabotage - as opposed to being totally stupid and uncooperative... I just don't see it succeeding... and once it's is all over... the down-in-the-weeds legal stuff is going to get forgotten when someone says ...2 years later.. that the outfitter sued the customers... that's the message that won't go away ... Concord, Calif waterslide park had to pay up lots of money when some high school kids got killed / injured on a collapsing slide. They pushed by the worker trying to stop them to make a large train of bodies lined together. Slide collapsed. Parents of those killed and injured sued and won. The weight was in excess of a large SUV. So the park has posted rules, and workers trying to enforce the rules and the people violating the rules on purpose get the proceeds. Not correct. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...&sn=005&sc=310 http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2...86-5568000_ITM http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...&sn=099&sc=813 |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 20, 5:49*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Larry G" wrote in message ... On May 18, 9:29 am, riverman wrote: On May 17, 7:13 am, Larry G wrote: In most liability situations.. involving rivers.. the outfitter ain't going to stay in business long at all if the word gets out that he sued a customer... right?- LOL, agreed. But I could easily see an outfitter countersuing if the passengers or their families sued for negligence. The countersuit would be based on the passengers conspiring to put the guide (and outfitter) in danger. And it probably wouldn't deter future passengers...at least those who weren't planning on being idiots. --riverman yup.... but how would you "prove" this? *Wouldn't you have to have some other customers in the raft on your side? the folks suing for damages... by the way.. are not going to really care who gets nailed for the damages... just get them... and sad to say.... the outfitter/guide, more than likely is going to be held at least partially responsible... because unless you can prove ... as it "legally" prove that someone ..on-purpose tried to sabotage - as opposed to being totally stupid and uncooperative... I just don't see it succeeding... * *and once it's is all over... the down-in-the-weeds legal stuff is going to get forgotten when someone says ...2 years later.. that the outfitter sued the customers... that's the message that won't go away ... Concord, Calif waterslide park had to pay up lots of money when some high school kids got killed / injured on a collapsing slide. *They pushed by the worker trying to stop them to make a large train of bodies lined together.. Slide collapsed. *Parents of those killed and injured sued and won. *The weight was in excess of a large SUV. *So the park has posted rules, and workers trying to enforce the rules and the people violating the rules on purpose get the proceeds. *Not correct.http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...6/03/MN74124.D... http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2...86-5568000_ITM http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...5/23/MN56027.D.... not correct...but the way it works...unfortunately.... and the reason why liability insurance is so high... and in turn why ticket/ride prices are no cheap. It only takes one idiot or a group to cause a tragedy and a lot of lawyers get rich. The Sierra Club offers outings - to the general public - and the whole idea has become painful in terms of rules and regs...qualifications of leaders, etc, because they are paranoid that one big lawsuit will wipe out their assets. |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 18, 9:29*am, riverman wrote:
On May 17, 7:13*am, Larry G wrote: In most liability situations.. involving rivers.. the outfitter ain't going to stay in business long at all if the word gets out that he sued a customer... right?- LOL, agreed. But I could easily see an outfitter countersuing if the passengers or their families sued for negligence. The countersuit would be based on the passengers conspiring to put the guide (and outfitter) in danger. And it probably wouldn't deter future passengers...at least those who weren't planning on being idiots. --riverman OK, Myron. Now... just HOW many raft guides can dance on the head of a pin? |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 28, 2:29*pm, Oci-One Kanubi wrote:
On May 18, 9:29*am, riverman wrote: On May 17, 7:13*am, Larry G wrote: In most liability situations.. involving rivers.. the outfitter ain't going to stay in business long at all if the word gets out that he sued a customer... right?- LOL, agreed. But I could easily see an outfitter countersuing if the passengers or their families sued for negligence. The countersuit would be based on the passengers conspiring to put the guide (and outfitter) in danger. And it probably wouldn't deter future passengers...at least those who weren't planning on being idiots. --riverman OK, Myron. *Now... just HOW many raft guides can dance on the head of a pin? is that with or without lawyers ? |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 29, 2:29*am, Oci-One Kanubi wrote:
On May 18, 9:29*am, riverman wrote: On May 17, 7:13*am, Larry G wrote: In most liability situations.. involving rivers.. the outfitter ain't going to stay in business long at all if the word gets out that he sued a customer... right?- LOL, agreed. But I could easily see an outfitter countersuing if the passengers or their families sued for negligence. The countersuit would be based on the passengers conspiring to put the guide (and outfitter) in danger. And it probably wouldn't deter future passengers...at least those who weren't planning on being idiots. --riverman OK, Myron. *Now... just HOW many raft guides can dance on the head of a pin? East coast or west coast? --riverman |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On May 28, 1:29*pm, Oci-One Kanubi wrote:
On May 18, 9:29*am, riverman wrote: On May 17, 7:13*am, Larry G wrote: In most liability situations.. involving rivers.. the outfitter ain't going to stay in business long at all if the word gets out that he sued a customer... right?- LOL, agreed. But I could easily see an outfitter countersuing if the passengers or their families sued for negligence. The countersuit would be based on the passengers conspiring to put the guide (and outfitter) in danger. And it probably wouldn't deter future passengers...at least those who weren't planning on being idiots. --riverman OK, Myron. *Now... just HOW many raft guides can dance on the head of a pin? How many raft guides does it take to change a lightbulb? Five. One to change the bulb and four to sit around drinking beer arguing about how big the hole was! John Kuthe... |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
"Calif Bill" wrote in message m... yup.... but how would you "prove" this? Wouldn't you have to have some other customers in the raft on your side? take it to th supreme court the folks suing for damages... by the way.. are not going to really care who gets nailed for the damages... just get them... and sad to say.... the outfitter/guide, more than likely is going to be held at least partially responsible... because unless you can prove ... as it "legally" prove that someone ..on-purpose tried to sabotage - as opposed to being totally stupid and uncooperative... I just don't see it succeeding... and once it's is all over... the down-in-the-weeds legal stuff is going to get forgotten when someone says ...2 years later.. that the outfitter sued the customers... that's the message that won't go away ... I understand Sotomayor is liberal on damages Concord, Calif waterslide park had to pay up lots of money when some high school kids got killed / injured on a collapsing slide. They pushed by the worker trying to stop them to make a large train of bodies lined together. Slide collapsed. Parents of those killed and injured sued and won. The weight was in excess of a large SUV. So the park has posted rules, and workers trying to enforce the rules and the people violating the rules on purpose get the proceeds. Not correct. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...&sn=005&sc=310 http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2...86-5568000_ITM http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...&sn=099&sc=813 hmmm mk5000 The complete package Sotomayor has both legal book smarts and the wisdom to use them well. Michael B. Keegan June 1, 2009 President Obama was nothing if not clear when describing the kind of person who he was looking to nominate to fill the vacancy left by Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court. He vowed to seek someone with a sharp intellect and an independent mind, someone who would judge each case on its merits. He said he was looking for a record of excellence and integrity. A former constitutional law professor, he made clear that it was important to select someone who has a clear sense of our Constitution and its history, and is committed to fidelity to the law. He also made clear that, although legal brilliance was necessary, it wasn't totally sufficient to fill the position. Yes, any nominee would need a record of intellectual achievement and a long résumé, but he or she would also need an ability to see beyond the legalese and abstract principles of a ruling, to its real-world impact on the ordinary Americans whose lives are affected by what happens in the chambers of the Supreme Court. Those criteria echoed the language he'd used on the campaign trail last year. In Judge Sonia Sotomayor, Obama found a candidate who has the complete package — both legal book smarts and the wisdom to use them well. Sotomayor comes to this nomination with an "only in America" story. Sotomayor grew up in a public housing project in the Bronx, N.Y. Her mother, born in Puerto Rico, held a deep belief in the power of education and worked long hours to make sure that her children would have the opportunity to take advantage of what her adopted country had to offer. Sotomayor graduated first in her high school class and won a scholarship to Princeton University, where she graduated summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa. At Yale Law School she served as an editor of The Yale Law Journal . Out of law school, Sotomayor became an assistant district attorney in Manhattan, where she tried dozens of serious criminal cases. In 1984 she entered private practice as an international corporate litigator. Before she was appointed to the federal judiciary in 1991 (by then-President George H.W. Bush), she'd worked on cases involving everything from intellectual property to real estate, banking and contract law. When she was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2d Circuit in 1998, she was the first Latina to sit on that court. Now, 18 years later, Sotomayor will bring more federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice in the past hundred years, and more overall judicial experience than anyone confirmed to the Court in the past 70 years. But Sotomayor brings more than a compelling life story. Sotomayor has a sophisticated grasp of legal doctrine and a keen awareness of the law's impact on everyday life. She understands that upholding the rule of law means ensuring consistent, fair, common sense application of the law to real-world facts. She has participated in more than 3,000 panel decisions and authored almost 400 published opinions, a body of work characterized by a close reading of the law and a consistent awareness of the importance of precedent and judicial restraint. She's worked to build consensus even on contentious issues — her record shows that she agrees with her more conservative colleagues far more frequently than she disagrees with them. And, as many analysts have already noted, she is also "the woman who saved baseball," perhaps the most important qualification of all. Selecting a nominee for the Supreme Court is a tremendous opportunity for any president. It's one of the few decisions that can instantly shape his legacy, for good or ill. President Obama wrote himself an impressively tall order when he described what he was looking for in a Supreme Court jurist. But perhaps more impressive is that he actually seems to have found it: someone who brings not only a sharp intellect but a common sense understanding of the effect the law has on the lives of ordinary people. Sotomayor's unique personal story and decadeslong career in nearly every aspect of the law provide her with ideal qualifications to be the next Supreme Court justice. And that's exactly what we need on our nation's highest court. ----- Original Message ----- From: "marika" Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.europe,soc.culture.jap an,soc.culture.australian,alt.usenet.legends.leste r-mosley Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 9:17 AM Subject: INTERNATIONAL STUFF | Webby Awards ▪ Green Vault ▪ Merkel’s Style ▪ Former Couture ▪ Blagojevich "Frank Kalder" wrote in message ... M. K. ~ e-glob, Washington, DC . Barack Obama’s Germany Visit Here’s a summary of my twofold coverage: http://tinyurl.com/HAPLIF-9605 & http://tinyurl.com/HAPLIF-9606 ======= RIGHT BEFORE Obama went on his overseas trips, he announced his pick, Sotomayor, for Supreme Court. It's an important issue hotly debated til the Congressional Hearings. I thought it might be interesting to contrast a different voice than I had heard before on this issue http://townhall.com/Columnists/Thoma...ntext_part_iii As part of the biographical preoccupation with Judge Sonia Sotomayor's past, the New York Times of May 31st had a feature story on the various New York housing projects in which she and other well-known people grew up-- including Whoopi Goldberg, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Thelonious Monk and Mike Tyson. There was a map of New York City and dots pin-pointing the location of the project in which each celebrity grew up. As an old New Yorker, I was struck by the fact that not one of the 20 celebrities shown grew up in a housing project in Harlem! The housing projects in which they grew up were different in another and more fundamental way. As the New York Times put it: "These were not the projects of idle, stinky elevators, of gang-controlled stairwells where drug deals go down." In other words, these were public housing projects of an earlier era, when such places were very different from what we associate with the words "housing project" today. Just the reference to unlocked doors on the apartments there, so that children could more easily visit playmates in nearby apartments on Saturday mornings to watch television, creates an image that must seem like something out of another world to those familiar only with the housing projects of today. There were standards for getting into the projects of those days and, if you didn't live up to those standards, they put you out. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar was quoted as saying, "When kids played on the grass, their parent would get a warning." That seems almost quaint when you think of what has gone on in the housing projects of a later era. Since there has been so much talk of putting some of Sonia Sotomayor's inflammatory words "in context," perhaps we should put her personal life in context, if the media insist on making her personal life a factor in her nomination to the Supreme Court. While she grew up in a public housing project, the words "housing project" in that era did not mean anything like the housing projects of today. A relative of mine lived in one of the housing projects back then-- and we were proud of him, as well as glad for him, because such places were for upright citizens in those days-- working class people with steady jobs and good behavior. Clever intellectuals had not yet taught us to be "non-judgmental" about misbehavior or to make excuses for vandalism and crime. |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
"riverman" wrote in message ... Curious. Does this imply that anyone (even a nonpaddling bow passenger) who is drunk in a canoe is liable for 'operating under the influence'? Do passengers on a sailboat or motorboat have the same accountability? =========== It's all in the wording of the statute or regulation and sometimes even prior cases. How many times have we heard of people getting socked for DUI when all they were doing was getting their head cleared in the car til they could drive. Who knows mk5000 "Do it today! Come to the meeting It's true that we're eating the cannibals! Eating the cannibals! Don't close your eyes "--heaven and hell |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
On Jun 6, 9:47*pm, "marika" wrote:
(snip) LOL. Now THAT'S what I call a hijacked thread. --riverman |
Woman Charged After Deadly Canoeing Accident
"riverman" wrote in message ... LOL. Now THAT'S what I call a hijacked thread. well at least I was fair balanced having presented two very different viewpoints that could have supported either outcome in the deadly canoe case mk5000 " Love theme from Titanic, not really appropriate right now! "--Larry Daley, Night at the Museum Battle of the Smithsonian |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:38 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com