#Stowell court

[maypoleman1]

8th April

Stowell Court Candle Auction

Source: Candle Auction by Deepa Acharya on LinkedIn

In the second week of April, the Stowell Court Candle Auction takes place at Tatworth in Somerset. The auction is for a year long ownership of Stowell Mead, a watercress bed. Bidding lasts until the tallow candle, which is the sole light illuminating the auction room, burns down. During the auction the doors are locked and once the winner is declared, the participants retire for a splendid repast of bread, cheese and… watercress.

[malspinningyarns]

Random thoughts on Bridgerton Season 3 rewatch episode 1

I love Portia’s Norma Desmond-esque coat when she leaves the carriage.

Do the Bridgerton girls reuse the same court dress or are they just really similar? Same cut and fabric, different embellishments?

Parrot!

I think Colin’s return hair is my favorite styling. So swoopy.

There is a tiny bee embroidered on Benedict’s waistcoat

It is the Stowells who use BSL in the debut at Court , so I think it is Lady Stowell who is Deaf. I think we hear Miss Stowell speak later talking to Benedict.

What is the order the debutantes get presented in? I can’t figure it out

Poor, sweet Francesca is so bad at socializing.

Violet loves Penelope so much. She doesn’t like Cressida at all.

Colin’s voice is back to normal talking to Pen compared to the rest of the debutants

He’s trying so hard to impress her. And he gets denied. 😂

First appearance of Colin’s yellow waistcoat the day after court presentation

Mr. Dundas is an RSC actor! He was a great Benedick in the like 2014 Much Ado About Nothing.

We love a sneaky way to do an intimate scene (Anthony covering his head to go down on Kate).

God, I love Penelope’s gold shoes.

I do get a kind of desire vibes from Cressida staring at Penelope’s dress reveal

All of these men are regretting talking to Penelope. Poor dear Pen. I’m also shit at talking.

The sad thing is I know all the embroidery stitches.

I would love to see the Zebra Ball.

Anthony glaring at his old friends talking to Francesca. Love to see it.

Also, how do these men expect a young lady to answer “what makes you tick?” Fucking weirdos.

I love the conversation between Penelope and Francesca.

Penelope getting brain freeze was very Princess Diaries. Can someone gif that reference? Also a film where the heroine is in love with her best friend’s older brother.

After Cressida rips Penelope’s dress, you can clearly see that the are trying to cover up Claudia’s cast.

Listen, the “I miss you” line was such flirting but genuinely. Even if he doesn’t know it.

Eloise lecturing Cressida on frankness is honestly a bit hilarious

I love Eloise’s coat

1st appearance of Eloise’s summer muff to hide Claudia’s cast

Anthony and Kate leaving to make an heir: good for them. Probably not great for Violet because she has to handle her neurodivergent children by herself

Colin is so soft with Pen, I can’t. 🥹

I’m not sure who is dumber for this plan. Like it’s a dumb, but well-intentioned plan for Colin. Penelope, you know you love him.

Prudence and Phillipa, don’t you have your own homes?

[movies-to-add-to-your-tbw]

Title: Bridge of Spies

Rating: PG-13

Director: Steven Spielberg

Cast: Tom Hanks, Mark Rylance, Amy Ryan, Alan Alda, Sebastian Koch, Austin Stowell, Billy Magnussen, Michael Simon Hall, Edward James Hyland, Stephen Kunken

Release year: 2015

Genres: thriller, drama, history

Blurb: During the Cold War, the Soviet Union captures U.S. pilot Francis Gary Powers after shooting down his U-2 spy plane. Sentenced to ten years in prison, Powers’ only hope is New York lawyer James Donovan, recruited by a CIA operative to negotiate his release. Donovan boards a plane to Berlin, hoping to win the young man’s freedom through a prisoner exchange. If all goes well, the Russians will get Rudolf Abel...the convicted spy Donovan defended in court.

[fusion360]

The Difference Between a Felony and a Misdemeanor

Felonies and misdemeanors are two different classifications of crimes, with different potential punishments. In this blog post, we will discuss the key differences between felonies and misdemeanors. Most often, a felony lawyer from Stowell Crayk law firm is the best solution for minimizing punishment.

Felony: A felony is a serious crime that is punishable by a year or more in prison. 

Misdemeanor: A misdemeanor is a less serious crime that is punishable by less than a year in jail. 

The severity of a crime is determined by a number of factors, including the following:

The level of violence involved

The amount of property damage caused

Whether the victim was injured

Whether the crime was committed against a person in a position of trust, such as a police officer or a teacher

Whether the crime was committed with a weapon

The defendant's criminal history

However, the penalties for felonies and misdemeanors can vary depending on the state and the specific crime.

Here are some examples of felonies and misdemeanors:

Felonies: Murder, rape, robbery, burglary, arson, drug trafficking, and grand theft

Misdemeanors: Simple assault, petty theft, disorderly conduct, public intoxication, and traffic violations

Felony and misdemeanor definitions and charges can differ by state. The same crime can vary from felony to misdemeanor based on circumstances. For instance, a simple assault causing serious injury may become a felony, while one without serious injury may be a misdemeanor. Consult a felony lawyer if facing such charges to grasp your situation and potential penalties.

Personal Impact

The impact of a felony conviction on a person's life can be significant. Felony convictions can make it difficult to find a job, get housing, obtain financial aid, and vote. They can also lead to deportation for non-citizens.

Wobble Offense

A wobbler offense is a crime that can be charged as either a felony or a misdemeanor, depending on the circumstances. The factors that prosecutors and judges consider when deciding whether to charge a wobbler offense as a felony or a misdemeanor include:

The severity of the crime

The defendant's criminal history

The defendant's age

The defendant's mental health

The defendant's amenability to rehabilitation

The public's interest

Felony, misdemeanor, and wobbler definitions vary by state, and crimes can be charged differently in various places. Consult a felony lawyer to grasp your charges and potential penalties if you've been accused of a crime.

What is an Infraction?

An infraction is a minor offense that doesn't lead to jail time and usually doesn't go on a criminal record. Typically, it results in fines or community service as the primary punishment.

Traffic tickets are the most common infractions, but other examples include trespassing, littering, disorderly conduct, and minor offenses.

Infractions typically don't require court or jail time, but ignoring them can lead to a criminal record or higher fines.

Infractions have varying classes, with moving violations (like speeding) often seen as more serious than non-moving violations (such as parking tickets). The law usually sets higher fines and potential penalties for different classes of infractions.

For an infraction charge, consult an attorney at Stowell Crayk to learn your rights and options. They can assist in challenging the charge or securing a plea deal to reduce the consequences.

Conclusion

The misdemeanor vs. felony distinction is crucial, with substantial life consequences. If charged with a crime, consult an attorney to grasp your charges and possible penalties.

In short, felonies and misdemeanors are different crimes with varying consequences. Felonies are more serious, often leading to over a year in prison, while misdemeanors result in less than a year in jail. Penalties depend on factors like violence and property damage. They vary by state but usually mean longer sentences, higher fines, and lasting consequences. Consult a felony lawyer if charged to understand your situation and defense options.

[biographydivider]

i adore your bookclub fics and i am wondering do you have hcs for what the madrigals love to read? 📖💕

Oh! Oh! The best thing a bookseller could be asked for! THEMED RECOMMENDATIONS!! These are based on my knowledge as a UK bookseller but most of these should be available in other places too. Okay so:

Bruno: The Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo, Taylor Jenkins Reid. My boy loves a melodramatic, tragic love story. He read The Bath Scene in Malibu Rising and didn't speak for an entire day, he was so bereft. Pepa: The Mercies, Kiran Millwood Hargrave. It's a period peice, it's emotional but not soul-destroying, it's perfect for a day when the crops need a watering. Julieta: Midnight Chicken, Ella Risbridger. This is a stunning cookbook/memoir about a woman finding healing and love through food. The prose is so soothing, and the food is delicious too! It'd be right up Juli's street. Abuela: Anything Agatha Christie, but especially Miss Marple stories. She likes a book where the murder is solved by the end. Agustín: Norwegian Wood: The guide to chopping, stacking and drying wood the Scandinavian way, Lars Mytting. He wants to be a rugged woodsman SO BAD, you guys. Félix: He buys a biography about a musician he likes every so often, but really he just reads whatever Pepa is reading so she has someone to talk about it with. They read together in bed. Félix wears little wire-rimmed reading glasses. Isabela: This Poison Heart, Kalynn Bayron. A girl who can summon forth plants at her will inherits an old, creepy house and fills it with poisonous plants. Isa read it in one night. Luisa: Heartstopper, Alice Oseman. Fluffy, adorable, romantic, features cute dogs. Luisa all over. Mirabel: Her Dark Wings, Melinda Salisbury. This one's not out yet so a kindly bookseller would have to sneak her a proof, but it's about a girl who lives in the shadow of her best friend finding her own power in the Underworld (and grabbing the attention of a Sexy Lord Of The Dead. Mira's just starting to like the idea of a brooding, angsty love interest, as we all do at 15. She'll soon be introduced to Rhysand in Court of Thorns and Roses...) Dolores: Act Your Age, Eve Brown, Talia Hibbert. A fluffy romcom with some REALLY GOOD SMUT. She read The Desk Scene and her cheeks burned for the rest of the day. (Seriously. Read Talia Hibbert. You'll thank me.) Camilo: Loki: A Bad God's Guide To Being Good by Louie Stowell. In my head Camilo is a tiny bit less confident than his primas and sister with his reading, but he likes the scribbly pictures and that Loki gets up to a ton of trouble...once he's done with them, he lends them to Antonio as an excuse to re-read them to his brother. Antonio: Grimwood, Nadia Shireen. He loved Barbara Throws A Wobbler, but Bruno got sick of reading it every night so they moved on to a chapter book by the same author. Lots of animals, lots of chances for silly voices.

[peacockbutch]

[ ID: image of a crowd marching, holding a large sign which read #UnistotenHeals, on top of the picture is text which reads “Port Injunction Press Conference and March 10AM Tomorrow, Feb 12th. At 800 Smithe - BC Supreme Court” /end ID ]

From voicesfrontlines on instagram 12/02/2020:

🚨 🚨ALERT 🚨 🚨 .

Wet’suwet’en Solidarity March.

Tomorrow, February 12th at 10am Urban Indigenous Sovereigntists Natalie Knight and Herb Varley and Geneva Stowell one of the arrested will be speaking at a Press Conference announcing the filing of a challenge to the Court Injunction against Land Defenders.  We will then March to a nearby location so please come down to 800 Smithe (BC Supreme Court) and show your support. .

Please share widely!!! .

Press Conference: 10 AM

March in solidarity with Wet’suwet’en: 11 AM

#WalkOutForWetsuweten #WetsuwetenStrong #unistoten #NoPipelines #IndigenousSovereignty #UnistotenCamp #WalkOutForWetsuweten #UrbanIndigenous #ReconciliationIsDead #PortBlockade #SupremeCourt #bcpoli

[victorianwhitechapel]

Annie Elizabeth & Alice Margaret Crook

Annie Elizabeth Crook was born in 1863 on London daughter of William Crook and Sarah Annie Quordisman (or Quatermane). Her father William, son of William and Sarah Crook, was baptised on October 24th 1830 and was from Eton, Berkshire, England. Her mother Sarah Annie was born around 1839.

Annie's parents married on May 25th 1829 at Upton Cum Chalvey, Buckinghamshire (about a mile from Eton). They were Anglicans.

The 1871 census the family is listed living in Upper Rathbone Place, Marylebone, London. No number is given on the census sheet. William Crook, pianoforte finisher, aged 40 from Eton was married to Annie Crook, aged 32, from Berwick on Tweed (Northumberland). They had three daughters, Annie E, aged 8 and born in London; and Alice and Caroline aged 7 months and born in London.

By 1881 the family had moved to No 2 Rose Street, London, and their details are given as follows: the head of the family was William Crook, still working as a pianoforte finisher, aged 50 and born in Eton. His wife is Sarah A. Crook, aged 42 and from Scotland. Two daughters were living with them: Annie, who was 18 and working as a general domestic servant, and Alice, who was 12. Catherine is not listed so between 1871 and 1881 she probably died.

On the 18th April 1885 Annie had a daughter, Alice Margaret, who was born at St Marylebone Workhouse, London, but there is no information about who was her father. She was baptised as an Anglican. They lived at No. 9 Pitt Street, Tottenham Court Road.

Sadly, on 22nd January 1889 Annie and her daughter Alice were brought to the Endell Street Workhouse [where they were recorded as 'destitute'] by PC 453D.

By 1891 the family had moved back to Upper Rathbone Place, but this time we have a number, No 16. William Crook was 60 and still working as a pianoforte finisher. His wife Sarah, aged 50, is listed working as a charwoman from Berwick, Scotland. Their 27th year-old daughter Annie, jam maker, is living with them, as well as her daughter Alice Margaret, aged 5.

Annie’s father William Crook would die that year (1891), according to Begg, Fido and Skinner's book The Complete Jack the Ripper A – Z. Annie's mother Sarah died on 1916.

Annie stayed at various workhouses later in her life, dying eventually in the Lunacy Ward of Fulham Road Workhouse on February 23rd 1920, aged 58. She suffered recurrent epilepsy.

Alice Margaret Crook married William Gorman on 14th July 1918, at St Aloysius Chapel in At Pancrass, and they had 5 children (all born between 1921 and 1927), including Joseph “Hobo” William Charles Gorman (22nd October 1925 - January 2003). Alice died aged 65 in 1950, William died the following year.

Joseph Gorman, Walter Sickert and Stephen Knight

In 1973 the BBC launched a television series, Jack the Ripper, which investigated the Whitechapel murders. The sixth and final programme included a testimony by Joseph Gorman, who called himself Joseph Sickert and claimed to be the illegitimate son of noted painter Walter Sickert. Gorman claimed that Sickert had told him a story that implicated not only the royal family but also a host of other famous people in the murders. According to Gorman, sir William Gull committed the murders with the help of accomplices.

Gorman said that his Catholic grandmother (Annie Elizabeth) had secretly married prince Albert Victor, and that his mother Alice Margaret, was the legitimate daughter of Albert Victor and the rightful heir to the throne. He claimed that the Ripper murders were staged as part of a conspiracy to hush up any potential scandal by murdering anyone who knew of the birth. In the original television series, the story is depicted as the belief of Gorman but not of the detectives. Captivated by Gorman's story, journalist Stephen Knight decided to investigate the claims further, and eventually published his research as the book Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution in 1976.

Gorman said that Albert Victor's mother, Princess Alexandra, introduced Walter Sickert to her son in the hope that Sickert would teach Albert Victor about art. Gorman claimed that Albert Victor met one of Sickert's models, Annie Elizabeth Crook, a Catholic shop girl, at Sickert's studio at 15 Cleveland Street. They had an affair and married in a secret ceremony with Sickert and Annie's friend, Mary Jane Kelly, acting as witnesses. Gorman alleged that Albert Victor and Annie's daughter, Alice Margaret Crook, was born on 18 April 1885, and that Albert Victor settled Annie and Alice into an apartment in Cleveland Street. According to Gorman, in April 1888 the Queen Victoria and the British Prime Minister Lord Salisbury discovered Albert Victor's secret. Gorman accused Salisbury of ordering a raid on the apartment because he was afraid that public knowledge of a potential Catholic heir to the throne would result in a revolution. Gorman claimed that Albert Victor was placed in the custody of his family, while Annie was placed in the custody of Sir William Gull, who certified her insane; she spent the next 30 years drifting in and out of institutions before dying in 1920.

Meanwhile, Gorman alleged, Kelly was looking after the daughter, Alice, both during and after the raid. Gorman asserted that at first Kelly was content to hide the child, but then she, along with her friends Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman and Elizabeth Stride, decided to blackmail the government. Gorman accused Salisbury of conspiring with his fellow freemasons, including senior policemen in the London Metropolitan Police, to stop the scandal by staging the murders of the women. Gorman said Salisbury assigned the task to Gull, who lured the four women into a carriage individually where Gull murdered them with the assistance of coachman John Netley and Sir Robert Anderson, Assistant Commissioner of Scotland Yard. Gorman claimed a fifth victim, Catherine Eddowes, was killed accidentally in a case of mistaken identity because she used the alias Mary Ann Kelly and was confused with Mary Jane Kelly. Gorman alleged that Netley tried to kill the young Alice twice but after the second unsuccessful attempt several witnesses chased Netley, who threw himself into the Thames and drowned. Gorman completed the story by saying that Alice lived well into old age, later becoming Walter Sickert's mistress, and that Alice and Walter Sickert were his parents.

Knight explained that at first he did not believe Gorman's sensational story, which seemed "arrant, if entertaining, nonsense", but was so entranced by it that he had to investigate further. In describing the progress of his investigation, Knight revealed a series of coincidences: according to him, the murders ended with the death of Mary Kelly; a woman named "Elizabeth Cook", who Knight claimed could be Annie Elizabeth Crook misspelt, did live at 6 Cleveland Street; Annie Crook was institutionalised; rumours of the time link Prince Albert Victor to a scandal in Cleveland Street; Gull was fond of grapes, and one of the victims may have been eating some at the time of her death; Gull matched the description of an unnamed physician accused by clairvoyant Robert James Lees, who claimed to have identified the Ripper by using psychic powers. Eventually, as the circumstantial coincidences build up, Knight became convinced that Gorman's story was true. The lack of tangible evidence, he claimed, was due to a government cover-up and deliberate misdirection of the police investigation.

There are many facts that contradict Knight's theory (as listed here) and his main source, Joseph Gorman, later retracted the story and admitted to the press that it was a hoax.

Historian and author Paul Begg recalls having met Ellen May Lackner (1909 – 2005), Joseph Gorman's cousin, in 1992, and published in Jack the Ripper: The Facts that she ”... Confirmed that elements of Gorman’s story circulated within the family during his infancy; the story, or elements of it, where not his invention. She recalled that wealthy people sometimes visited the house, and she thought there was a connection with the birth of Alice Margaret, who she thought she was the illegitimate daughter of Walter Sickert, not Prince Albert Victor, and although she vaguely remembered some mysterious and frightening connection with Jack the Ripper, she thought it was an invention to deter too much enquiry into Alice”.

Other authors have written about the subject (either the Royal Conspiracy or the Freemasonry Conspiracy, or both, or even mixed or variations of the story – different suspects, mothers of Prince Albert Victor's child, etc.), such as Donald McCormick (1959, The Identity of Jack the Ripper), Thomas E. A. Stowell (1970, "Jack the Ripper – A Solution?" in the November issue of The Criminologist), Elwyn Jones and John Lloyd (1975, The Ripper File, based in the 1973 BBC series 'Jack The Ripper'), Jean Overton-Fuller (1990, Sickert and the Ripper Crimes), Melvyn Fairclough (1991, The Ripper and the Royals), Andy Parlour, Sue Parlour and Kevin O'Donnell (1997, The Jack the Ripper Whitechapel Murders) and Patricia Cornwell (2002, Portrait of a Killer). Although all of them are marketed as non-fiction books, they are dismissed almost universally as derivative fantasies and as containing non reliable sources. 

Many novels and fiction books (Alan Moore’s and Eddie Campbell’s From Hell; Robin Paige’s Death at Whitechapel; Anne Perry's The Whitechapel Conspiracy, to name a few); films and TV series (A Study in Terror, Murder by Decree, Jack The Ripper 1988 TV series, The Ripper 1997 TV film, From Hell...); and even websites and blogs (Felicity Lowde Research) are based, with variation, with this theory.

***

TO KNOW MORE:

Casebook website  - Casebook Forums - Alleged Annie’s and Alice’s photographs

JTR Forums

“The Final Solution” wikipedia article

ALEXANDER, G. (2015): Jack The Ripper: Case Solved?

BEGG, Paul (2013): Jack The Ripper: The Facts.

BEGG, Paul; FIDO, Martin & SKINNER, Keith (2015): The Complete Jack the Ripper A – Z. The Ultimate Guide to the Ripper Mystery.

ODELL, Robin (2006): Ripperology: A Study of the World’s First Serial Killer and a Literary Phenomenon.

RUMBELOW, Donald (1975): Jack The Ripper: The Complete Casebook.

WOOD, Simon Daryl (2015): Deconstructing Jack: The Secret History of the Whitechapel Murders.

[credorllegat1971]

state farm insurance pennsylvania

BEST ANSWER: Try this site where you can compare quotes from different companies :bestinsurancequotes.top

state farm insurance pennsylvania

state farm insurance pennsylvania for one year $1.25. Lansing, MI – $1.13. Annuities, MI – $4.53. Lansing, MI – $5.49. Londons, MI – $6.75. Londons, MI – $7 and up. Marston, MI – $8 and up. Marietta, MI – $11.29. Mountain Valley, MI – $14.17. Montclair, WI - $16.02. Marsh, MT – $19.01. Mack Stowell, MT – $22.51. New Bloomfield, MT – $26.17. Naugatope, MT – $29.02. Nashville, TN – $32.26. North Star, TN – $36.12. Oceanside, TN – $37.06. P. state farm insurance pennsylvania farm insurance coverage on a farm car insurance policy. Farm insurance covers losses caused by accidents or other hazards. Farmers insurance policies are issued with the following coverage limits: Farmers Farm Animal Shield Plus Farm Animal Pack® Farm Animal Insurance Policies are designed for coverage over $1 million in assets (including $1 million in life insurance). You can customize your coverage options to address your personal needs and budget. Farm policy includes liability protection, personal injury protection, medical payments coverage, and more. You need to have more than $75,000 in liability insurance. If they make a claim to a Farm Animal Shield Plus car insurance policy, the liability limits will be higher. Farm car insurance covers up to $1 million in assets. There are additional coverages you can consider on your farm policy. You can file a claim, insure your livestock, farm land, or cover the loss of livestock, farm land, or farm equipment. Farm car insurance can cover up to $1 million in assets per year (if your. state farm insurance pennsylvania/cottonback/fiber-free, or just a free quote for car insurance. I have been with this company years without any problems. So, my insurance is good to, no accidents with an accident or being an independent driver. I am also not too active to be driving and pay the state . If they can do that to me when we are at my son’s best, my car will stay in the car, if not, we will get together with our auto that is insured thru this one of their agencies. You pay and they provide the same rates. I am looking for the best of their services but you can’t buy no cost auto insurance in the state of Texas as the Texas Farmers Union. I have a different reason that I’m a member of . You do not have to take us to court. We don’t really believe the insurance I have for my car. I just pay a bill for everything, all their claims are.

[fusion360]

Criminal Defense Law Firm: The Use of Social Media in Criminal Cases

In today's digital age, social media platforms have become an integral part of our lives, influencing how we connect, communicate, and share information. As the legal landscape continues to evolve, Stowell Crayk, a leading criminal defense law firm, recognizes the significance of understanding and navigating the complexities of social media in criminal cases.

The complicated role of social media in criminal defense can both aid and challenge legal proceedings. The team at Stowell Crayk is experienced in handling complex cases like these and understanding how social media can impact a case both positively and negatively.

1. Social Media as a Source of Evidence

One of the most significant developments in recent years is the use of social media as a valuable source of evidence in criminal cases. Platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok provide users with the means to document their daily lives, thoughts, and actions.

a. Incriminating Evidence: Prosecutors often explore social media profiles for incriminating posts or photos that can link a defendant to a crime. These could include confessions, videos of illegal activities, or even evidence of motive. 

b. Alibis and Defense: When used strategically, social media can provide alibis, establish character, or demonstrate that the defendant's actions were misconstrued.

2. Challenges in Authenticity and Privacy

While social media can be a treasure trove of information, its use in criminal cases also presents challenges.

a. Authenticity: It is not uncommon for individuals to create fake accounts or manipulate content. Criminal defense law firms must be vigilant in verifying the legitimacy of the evidence presented against their clients.

b. Privacy Concerns: Courts often grapple with the question of whether accessing private social media content without consent violates an individual's Fourth Amendment rights. 

3. Social Media Investigations

Social media platforms can be a goldmine for investigative work in criminal defense cases. Skilled attorneys and investigators can uncover vital information by:

a. Analyzing Posts: Examining a defendant's posts and interactions can provide insights into their state of mind, relationships, and possible motives.

b. Identifying Witnesses: Social media can help identify potential witnesses or corroborate the testimony of existing witnesses.

c. Locating Evidence: In some instances, social media can help locate physical evidence or establish timelines that are crucial to a case. A geotagged photo or video shared on social media might reveal the location of important evidence or establish a timeline critical to the case.

4. Social Media and Pre-Trial Publicity

The increased use of social media has had a profound impact on the pre-trial publicity surrounding criminal cases. High-profile cases can quickly become sensationalized, with information and opinions shared across various platforms. 

a. Jury Selection: The exposure of potential jurors to information related to a case on social media can impact their impartiality. Jury selection becomes a more intricate process, requiring attorneys to screen jurors for any bias.

b. Trial Strategy: Criminal defense law firms must develop strategies to address and mitigate the influence of social media on public opinion. This may involve challenging the admissibility of certain evidence or seeking a change of venue.

5. Ethical Considerations

The use of social media in criminal defense also raises important ethical considerations for attorneys. They must navigate a fine line between zealous representation and ethical responsibilities:

a. Client Communication: Advising clients to refrain from posting about their case or discussing it with others on social media is a common practice to protect clients from social media.

b. Disclosure Obligations: Ethical rules may require attorneys to disclose relevant social media evidence to the prosecution, even if it may harm their client's case.

Conclusion

Social media's extensive presence in our lives has started a new era for criminal defense law. The use of social media as evidence, a tool for investigation, and a source of pre-trial publicity has become a standard practice in the legal field. As Stowell Crayk and other leading criminal defense law firms adapt to this digital landscape, it is crucial to strike a balance between harnessing the benefits of social media and addressing its challenges.

In an age where a single tweet or Facebook post can alter the course of a criminal case, the importance of a skilled and tech-savvy legal defense cannot be overstated. Attorneys must continue to stay up-to-date on emerging trends and best practices to effectively advocate for their clients in this digital age.

[hedonismoaudiovisual]

Sensibilidad y excelencia para celebrar a una deportista gigantesca

El espectador que no se haya informado acerca del argumento de La batalla de los sexos (Jonathan Dayton, Valerie Faris, 2017) antes de concurrir al cine, se sorprenderá al descubrir que lo más conmovedor del film está por fuera del partido famoso que protagonizaron Billie Jean King y Bobby Riggs y que el largometraje se concentra, principalmente, en la vida personal y política de la legendaria tenista estadounidense.

Lógicamente, aquella exhibición histórica que ambos protagonizaron en Houston en los 70's tiene un rol importante en la trama (con una ambientación, vestuario, dobles de cuerpo que representan los movimientos de los tenistas y material documental notables) pero lo que resulta verdaderamente cautivante durante las dos horas de proyección es el trabajo minucioso sobre el personaje de King. En esta construcción espléndida intervienen, por un lado, la sensibilidad y sutileza de los directores para narrar el temperamento categórico, el feminismo y la revelación de una nueva elección sexual para la protagonista y, por otro, el talento e inteligencia de Emma Watson para interpretar, sin imitar, el alma, la esencia, de la figura representada. Así, la escena de las jugadoras en el salón de belleza antes de una sesión de prensa resulta una síntesis precisa de la hermosura que prima en la película: directores que recortan rostros, miradas y movimientos acompañando con música apropiada y una actriz dotada de gestos y expresiones para transmitir sentimientos intensos sin reforzar o empalagar.

No es menor la cuestión política y social en la obra como tampoco lo fue en la juventud de Billie Jean: su lucha fundadora por la igualdad de premios entre mujeres y varones (debate que hoy sigue en discusión y que en Argentina tuvo a jugadoras contemporáneas a King como Raquel Giscafré o Elvira Weisenberger entre sus pioneras), su enfrentamiento al machismo dominante de la prensa y la oposición con jugadoras más conservadoras como la australiana Margaret Court están plasmados con rigor histórico y dinamismo, enriqueciendo todavía más la producción. Otro aspecto interesante del film tiene que ver con una toma de posición que, si bien da cuenta de la historia de Riggs sin juzgarlo o ridiculizarlo, estará indudablemente del lado de King, pronunciándose a favor de la lucha por los derechos de las minorías, la paridad y la integración.

Decía que, aunque no es lo más preponderante de la cinta, el encuentro trascendental entre King y Riggs se presenta recreado de forma magistral y en esta reconstrucción resulta especialmente vibrante el montaje del partido con voleas, tiros ganadores y diversas series de puntos entre ambos (la tenista profesional Kaitlyn Cristian prestó su cuerpo para representar a Stone/King) alternados con archivos documentales reales del '73. La secuencia del desenlace en la que no faltan la emoción genuina y la conciencia inspiradora de que algo comenzará a cambiar en el deporte y en la sociedad después del evento están al nivel de una película bella, íntima y poderosa.  

Por Gabriel Yurdurukian. 

Título original: Battle of the Sexes. Año: 2017. Duración: 121 min. País: Estados Unidos. Dirección: Jonathan Dayton,  Valerie Faris. Guión: Simon Beaufoy. Música: Nicholas Britell. Fotografía: Linus Sandgren. Montaje: Pamela Martin. Reparto: Emma Stone, Steve Carell, Andrea Riseborough, Elisabeth Shue, Bill Pullman,Austin Stowell, Sarah Silverman, Alan Cumming, Eric Christian Olsen, Jessica McNamee, Mickey Sumner, James Mackay, Agnes Olech,  Chet Grissom, Chip Chinery, John C. McGinley.

[pigballoon]

Battle of the Sexes

(Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris, 2017)

Ever since their days directing music videos, Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris have had something of an eye for nostalgia in their work. From All Around the World by Oasis, to the Red Hot Chili Peppers’ Otherside, and the iconic and immortal Tonight, Tonight by the Smashing Pumpkins, the majority of their outstanding work in the field was heavily influenced by days gone by.

Now, 5 years on from Ruby Sparks, their sort of under the radar second feature, the husband and wife duo bring said penchant for the nostalgic to their big screen work with a Simon Beaufoy penned chronicling of the most famous tennis match ever played.

The movie is, as most movies of its kind tend to be, pretty much trash history (that’s just going based on well known facts, and not the other assorted rumours) but it is also, as the best movies of its kind tend to be, one hell of a fairytale. For while the movie seems like it simplifies a lot of what went on during this historic period in womens tennis, it never does so to the extent that it loses that something special that ensures it remains engaging drama.

Central to that is the fact that it makes neither demon of Bobby Riggs, nor saint of Billie Jean King (villain duty instead reserved for Jack Kramer, and Margaret Court). Riggs proves probably the most interesting character in the film, one that might have deserved a movie all of his own (even if it still manages to feel like something of a simplistic skirting over the surface of the man) and in being so he provides Steve Carell with a role tailored for him. Carell like few other movie stars around has the ability to play and blend both the achingly soulful, and the side splittingly hilarious, so he’s very much in his element with this one. 

Across the court Emma Stone is the heart and soul of the movie, and while the representation of King also feels like something of a simplification of the character (she’s another who could easily make for a magical movie all her own) it still gets enough of that conflict between the confused woman, the tennis champion, and the cultural trailblazer to make her an interesting enough figurehead for the movie, even if I feel like (perhaps in order to remain more engaging to a wider audience) they definitely stop shy of going too deeply into all of that, focusing instead (again) on the more outward, surface level relationship stuff.

Still, as I said, it works well enough at being what it is to avoid earning too much criticism for what it might have been, that’s thanks in large part to the wonderful cast, with Stone and Carell aided by smaller, memorable turns from the magnificent Sarah Silverman doing so much with nothing, Andrea Riseborough, Alan Cumming (hamming it up like few others can), Bill Pullman, Elisabeth Shue, Natalie Morales, Jessica McNamee, and maybe best out of everyone, Austin Stowell, playing a role that feels like an apology, his Larry King’s role in history so massively downplayed in the story that they’ve instead gifted him with the most sympathetic, likeable character in the film.

Yet I think ultimately you have to circle back to Dayton and Faris when handing out ultimate credit. Their production is so smooth that the niggling problems someone might take with Beaufoy’s writing don’t matter, their handle on their performers so strong, things handled with a lightness of touch that keep proceedings palatable for the masses, while at the same time injected with enough weight that this all still feels like it matters.

Battle of the Sexes certainly does a great job at getting across the enormity of the event it recreates, the larger moment in history that surrounded it, and at least a little of the complex nature of its central figures. It proves a great time at the movies, a great sports movie (whether you believe what took place was sport, and not something closer to pro wrestling ^_^), and at least an interesting look back at history, even if it fails to go quite as in depth as the material might have deserved.

[bellabooks]

Billie Jean King – Love: The Queer Gaze in “Battle of the Sexes”

*Contains some mild spoilers for Battle of the Sexes   Battle of the Sexes (2017) has been advertised as a tennis movie, which is unsurprising given that it’s a retelling of the infamous 1973 match between Bobby Riggs (Steve Carrell) and Billie Jean King (Emma Stone). But in the midst of all of that tennis, there is a surprisingly beautiful queer love story that hasn’t garnered nearly as much attention as the numerous clips of Bobby Riggs spewing misogyny. It’s 2017 and it’s frustrating to feel surprise when a queer romance is portrayed well onscreen, but Battle of the Sexes is almost exhilarating at times because the relationship between Billie Jean and her hairdresser, Marilyn Barnett (Andrea Riseborough), is portrayed with such delicacy and respect that it’s easy to forget about the tennis completely and instead focus on the film’s refreshingly queer gaze. It would be easy for Battle of the Sexes to fall into tropes typical of queer cinema. After all, it dances around many themes that are all too common (and increasingly tired) when it comes to chronicling the gay experience: gay panic, sexual confusion, and homophobia. Not that these are unimportant, quite the opposite, but the way they are interpreted needs reconsideration and new life. Billie Jean is a married woman, her husband, Larry (Austin Stowell), is, in her own words, “a good man.” She is undoubtedly confused by her own longings and frightened, a fear made manifest by her tennis rival, Australian champion, Margaret Court (Jessica McNamee), who describes Billie Jean’s rumored lesbianism as sinful and immoral. But Battle of the Sexes reclaims these stereotypical narratives by carefully shifting how these tropes play out. Billie Jean certainly experiences panic in her burgeoning relationship with Marilyn, but there is also a sense that she is aware of the inevitability of her desire. She is scared because she knows that being openly queer will lead to the loss of her career and, to a lesser extent, her family, but she also recognizes that what is happening between her and Marilyn is important and undeniable. The depiction of Margaret Court is also notable because while it may seem that Bobby Riggs is supposed to be the villain, it’s Court’s homophobia that makes her an unsympathetic figure. When she loses her own tennis match with Bobby Riggs, the women of the film are devastated, concerned that her loss will set the Women’s Liberation Movement back, but for an audience that knows Court frowns upon Billie Jean, it’s difficult to feel any compassion for her. The great love of Billie Jean’s life is tennis and her laser focus on the game stands in stark contrast to how she is depicted when Marilyn appears on camera. Their first scene together takes place in a hair salon. It’s an obvious safe-space for women as they discuss their upcoming tennis tournament and their dissatisfaction with their male lovers. Marilyn is present the entire time, slightly out of focus, darting about Billie Jean as she cuts her hair, but it is only when Marilyn makes a quip about men that Billie Jean turns from her friends and really focuses on her. And that’s when the tone of the film changes entirely. The camera finds Marilyn in close-up, the focus is on her eyes, her lips, her wrist. Billie Jean is suddenly surrounded by this woman. The scene is sensual in the literal sense of the word, visually the tight close up shots of Billie Jean’s eyes meeting Marilyn’s in the mirror are claustrophobic. The soundtrack swells in what quickly becomes familiar as the film’s Billie Jean and Marilyn love theme. Billie Jean asks about Marilyn’s perfume and the camera lingers on Marilyn’s wrist and hands, there are numerous shots of Marilyn gently touching Billie Jean’s hair. Their meet/cute is not so much ‘cute’ as it is all-consuming. Marilyn is omnipresent in Billie Jean’s world because the camera makes it so. There is nowhere else to look, nowhere else Billie Jean, and by extension, the audience, is invited to look. Marilyn appears fractured, a collection of body parts that only come into view when Billie Jean looks at her. And it’s that look, Billie Jean’s dreamy gaze that elevates their relationship from a subplot to the heart of the film. Their one love scene is again shot in close up. Marilyn removes Billie Jean’s glasses, her armor, her identifier, and it is only then that Billie Jean lets go and allows herself to take what she wants. Like their first meeting, the scene does not focus on the eroticism of their union, but rather the intimacy of the exchange. This is not about nudity or cheap titillation – for a film that spends a lot of time on the chauvinist rhetoric of Bobby Riggs and his ilk, it’s a testament to the sensitivity of the filmmakers that Billie Jean and Marilyn are given an extraordinary amount of dignity in their moment of truest vulnerability. The real love triangle of Battle of the Sexes is not between two women and a man, but rather, between Billie Jean, her love for tennis, and her personal struggle with her sexuality. Larry and Marilyn could be ciphers, both blonde and blue-eyed and inherently kind. They cannot compete with Billie Jean’s dedication to her sport and her cause, but they serve as a visual representation of Billie Jean’s internal struggle. Larry knows her better than anyone. He ices he knees and accompanies her to business meetings. But it’s Marilyn that she seeks with her eyes, Marilyn who sometimes blends into the crowd until Billie Jean looks for her with a gaze that brings her into sharp focus. As the film ends, Ted Tinling (Alan Cumming), who is both the designer of Billie Jean’s uniforms and her queer fairy-godfather tells her, “Times change, you should know, you just changed them.” And that message feels especially relevant when juxtaposed with the image of Emma Stone and Andrea Riseborough nestled together in bold black and white on a recent cover of Out Magazine. Battle of the Sexes does not get trapped by its historical setting, it looks to the future and sees a world Billie Jean King had a hand in creating. And it does this by celebrating its heroine’s queerness, making it as integral and important to the plot as her tennis serve.   All photos via Twentieth Century Fox http://dlvr.it/PvKXZK

[bluecollarfilm]

Battle of the Sexes (2017)

The electrifying 1973 tennis match between World number one Billie Jean King (Emma Stone) and ex-champ and serial hustler Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell) was billed as The Battle of the Sexes and became one of the most watched televised sports events of all time. The match caught the zeitgeist and sparked a global conversation on gender equality, spurring on the feminist movement. Trapped in the media glare, King and Riggs were on opposite sides of a binary argument, but off-court each was fighting more personal and complex battles. With a supportive husband urging her to fight the Establishment for equal pay, the fiercely private King was also struggling to come to terms with her own sexuality, while Riggs gambled his legacy and reputation in a bid to relive the glories of his past. Together, Billie and Bobby served up a cultural spectacle that resonated far beyond the tennis courts and animated the discussions between men and women in bedrooms and boardrooms around the world.

Directed by:   Valerie Faris & Jonathan Dayton

Starring:   Emma Stone, Steve Carell, Andrea Riseborough, Sarah Silverman, Bill Pullman, Alan Cumming, Elisabeth Shue, Austin Stowell, Jessica Mcnamee, Natalie Morales, Fred Armisen, Martha MacIsaac, Mickey Sumner, Bridey Elliott, Eric Christian Olsen, Wallace Langham, Matt Malloy

Release date:   September 22, 2017

[haroldgross]

New Post has been published on Harold Gross: The 5a.m. Critic

New Post has been published on http://literaryends.com/hgblog/battle-of-the-sexes/

Battle of the Sexes

[3 stars]

Another timely biopic, handled with honesty and consummate ability by the main actors, Emma Stone (La La Land) and Steve Carell (Cafe Society, Despicable Me). Though neither actor looks quite like their real-life counterpart, both make you forget they aren’t the real Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs through subtle facial moves, posture, and vocal control. At times it is eerie.

Additional characters help provide story vector or commentary. Jessica McNamee (Sirens) as Margaret Court is an uncomfortable bridge from the past into the film’s present while Bill Pullman (The Equalizer) is a nasty depiction of the thoughts of the times. As a fun side-note, and probably most out of place in this movie, is Alan Cumming (queers.). But it’s Alan Cumming, so I really didn’t care that it felt just a bit shimmed in; he’s too much fun.

Two of the most thankless roles in this recounting are the spouses of King and Riggs. Austin Stowell (Colossal) and Elisabeth Shue (Hope Springs), respectively, are quiet pillars in the storm of their relationships, understanding who they were married to and finding ways to deal with that. And then there is Andrea Riseborough’s (Birdman) character, who wants to be part of the support, but who struggles to understand what is really going on. This collective of people is part of what sets this story apart. None are quite what you expect either in word or action. Writer Simon Beaufoy (Everest) did his most subtle work around these characters and helped make it feel even more real.

Interestingly, this was co-directed by wife/husband power team  Valerie Faris and Jonathan Dayton (Ruby Sparks, Little Miss Sunshine) which probably helped keep the sensibilities all in line, though their particular leaning is clear. The result is both humorous and enlightening. The film is certainly a cure for thinking we’ve made no progress in the last 40 years, as well as a reminder of how much more there still is to do, even after all this time and all that effort.

[spryfilm]

“Battle of the Sexes” (2017)

Drama

Running Time: 121 minutes

Written by: Simon Beaufoy

Directed by:  Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris

Featuring: Emma Stone, Steve Carell, Sarah Silverman, Bill Pullman, Alan Cumming, Elisabeth Shue, Austin Stowell, Eric Christian Olsen

Bobby Riggs: I’m the ladies number one. I’m the champ. Why would I lose? 

Billie Jean King: Because dinosaurs can’t play tennis. 

With last year seemingly being a watershed for women in film for a variety of reasons, the sexual scandals that have been uncovered, the great roles that have come about as well as the record breaking super hero movie “Wonder Woman” (2017), this new film from Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris may seem like an after thought, but it is actually something more enigmatic than at first glance. Not only is “Battle of the Sexes” (2017) a film about rampant sexism and the battle to fight that, it is also about the prejudices of the time, when people could not follow their hearts as society at large would persecute as well as hound them into the ground. This last aspect has huge echoes through to today, especially in the US where civil as well as social rights are under attack from the highest levels of government as well as Middle America.

Directors Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris who are known for their Oscar nominated (winning for Alan Arkin and Best Screenplay) “Little Miss Sunshine” (2006) which, like this new film dealt with gender issues as well as challenging societal norms in terms of beauty pageants as well as familial roles. It was a huge success in terms of box office, critical acclaim and annual awards. What this new film does of course is to act as a period piece that is based around a real event, fictionalizing some aspects as well as highlighting others. To its credit it maintains a balancing act between at least three separate main narratives, as well as a few minor ones. To be fair the one major criticism of mine is that the various narrative strands become a bit attenuated so the audience ends up getting pieces of each one, but never a full deep dive, which is a disservice to the real people that are being portrayed.

“Battle of the Sexes” dramatizes the events leading up to the 1973 match between Billie Jean King (Emma Stone) and Robert Larimore Riggs (Steve Carell), and their personal lives. After a tumultuous personal life that ends with Riggs in a broken marriage he hits upon the idea of a challenge match against the top woman player, boasting that even at age 55 he can beat any woman. King declines, but Margaret Court (Jessica McNamee), who recently beat King in a match, accepts. Riggs easily defeats Court and King decides she has to accept his challenge.

Don’t get me wrong, this is a thoroughly enjoyable film led by its two stars Emma Stone as King and Steve Carell as Riggs who at this stage of their careers have proven that they can do anything. Both of these actors inhabit their roles as well as echoing the real personalities in a very eerie way, which works in the movies favor, legitimizing them as well as being exceptionally believable. Not only do both of the actors have to play the parts of famous people they also have to show a few sides to their personalities giving three dimensional performances that jump off the screen and make this a must see film. Their preparation as well as execution is flawless, it is only a shame the film was not more successful as they are worth the admission price alone. When portraying real people who are larger than life it is imperative to make them human and not some other larger than life character, this has been done here effectively enough that after a while you do start to empathize with both.

The film is rounded out with a stellar supporting cast led by Brit Andrea Riseborough as King’s lover Marilyn Barnett who meet when Bennett is Kings hairdresser. They have to hide their relationship from everyone, as a Lesbian affair would have ruined King, who was married to a man at the time. Riseborough who has been around for some time working in the US as well as in the UK has made a name for herself in great supporting roles, which is her role in this film. This could have been a showy performance but Riseborough internalizes much of the emotion underplaying the part so as to not have to match Stone’s flashiness so that you understand what each person is going through. The rest of the cast is rounded out with a colorful performance by comedienne Sarah Silverman (coming off her great performance in “I Smile Back” (2017)), the always reliable Bill Pullman as a sexist tennis official and commentator, Elisabeth Shue as Riggs wife, Alan Cumming as a fashion designer and Natalie Morales as Rosie Casals, a tennis player. There are many more terrific minor performances but these are definitly the highlights.

The problem with the film is that there is so much plot to mine that the screenwriter Simon Beaufoy doesn’t know how much to concentrate on each aspect, or what the most important is, which means we do not spend enough time on any one arc. That is not to say that the main thread, the game between Riggs and King is not played out with a conclusion coming from that, it is, but it seems like an afterthought in the end. In fact there could be entire films given over to almost each element of this story, which is how important and big each plot point is. What we get is paint by numbers story that whilst it is extremely important each part seems relegated to another, without a central thread running through it.

As this is a period film, which is set in the 1970s the look and feel of “Battle of the Sexes” is of utmost importance as it is the glue that holds it all together. If the audience does not buy the world in which it operates then this impacts on all sections of the movie. The first aspect of the movie is the costumes which all look authentic with their style and colors which are in direct contrast to many other movies today, they are unique and work well. The sets and locations look like they could be straight out of a documentary, it is refreshing to see the use of CGI to enhance the picture to give a look of authenticity, it places the era precisely.

The other elements I enjoyed within the film was the setting up of the women’s tour, as well as all the issues the women had with that, getting a sponsor, paying their own way as well as pay equity which haunts the workplace today. The fact that King had to hide her sexual identity for decades is a major part as well, with her leading a triple life, one on the tour, one with her husband and one with her lover which would have been torture, again something that is echoed today, with the added twist that things have not progressed much further. You need only see how many people are still closeted who are public figures. Finally the gender equality issue where women are seen as equals to men is something that the film is supposed to be primarily about, when it focuses on that it comes alive mainly when Riggs and King are jabbing at each other – it is no surprise to know they were friendly in real life.

The quality of this film is plain to see, it has amazing performance which both Stone and Carrel have been nominated for in a variety of different guilds. The only real issue is the overall story which is a little muddled as well as unfocused. I recommend this though as it is very good at balancing the drama as well as the humor of which it has in abundance. It is very well directed and the dialogue is terrific with the subject matter taken very seriously as the stakes for everyone were high. It may seem along time ago when this game occurred but the echoes through time are evident in our present day.

“Battle of the Sexes” is out on DVD & Blu-ray on the 11th January 2018.

  DVD & Blu-ray review: “Battle of the Sexes” (2017) “Battle of the Sexes” (2017) Drama Running Time: 121 minutes Written by: Simon Beaufoy Directed by:  Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris…

[ultraheydudemestuff]

Warren County Courthouse

300 East Silver St.

Lebanon, OH Warren County, OH, is named after Joseph Warren, who was a physician from Boston and fought in the American Revolution. Warren was a major general in the Revolutionary army and died in the Battle of Bunker Hill on June 17, 1775. The original Warren County Courthouse in Lebanon, OH, was built in 1835 by architect Ebed Stowell and contractor Meeker L. Morton. After a fire destroyed it in 1874, it was rebuilt in 1877-1880, as designed by architect M.D. Beebe and completed at a cost of $25,000. An 1894 addition was designed by architect William Bryden,

This old brick courthouse, which sits in the Lebanon business district, has been remodeled so many times that little of the original design remains visible. The most recent renovation, in 1998, involved making space for various county offices. The county’s courts are housed elsewhere in the new Warren County Courthouse, built in 1980, which is located at 500 Justice Drive in Lebanon. The old building, located at 300 East Silver St. in the county seat of Lebanon, is still in use today as the county administrative building.