#The Weinstein Law Group

[obii-wan-kenobiii]

PROPOSITION 33, BROKEN DOWN:

long post below the cut - scroll for tldr

let’s start from the beginning - what IS prop 33?

proposition 33, put simply, allows for city councils to set rent caps on housing in their cities. this would repeal a state law known as the costa hawkins rental housing act that prevents local governments from controlling rent on single-family homes, homes built after 1995 (or earlier in some cases), and when tenants move out. if it passes, local governments could create whatever measures they want to limit annual rent increases, and the state couldn’t intervene. (source) now, what this actually MEANS is that landlords can’t endlessly raise rent prices for their own gains. for the last 30 years, california has imposed limits on the amount a city can interfere with rent prices via the costa-hawkins act (source). proposition 33 allows cities to individually control rent on any type of housing.

now, why is this relevant?

according to the public policy institute of california, around 30% of california renters spend more than half their income on rent. to put this in perspective, 44% of the 39 million people living in california are renters. that means 17,160,000 people rent somewhere to live in california. now, 30% of those people is about 5,148,000 people. think about that. over five million people who pay over half their income to live. (source) (source) on top of this, a study by UCSF has shown that californians are homeless because of sky high rent costs pushing people out onto the streets.

let’s move onto common arguments against prop 33, and why they either are irrelevant in the face of the issue specifically or why the benefits of proposition 33 being passed outweigh the negative effects it may have! please note that the current state of housing in california will be referred to as the status quo.

funded by notorious slumlord

no guarantee that living conditions are good

could decrease property value, further contributing to the shortage of housing available

eliminates protection for seniors, veterans, and the disabled

weakens renter protections

overturns over 100 state affordable housing laws

prop 33 would repeal the strongest rent control law in the nation

and now, let’s break all of these down!

“prop 33 is funded by a notorious slumlord” proposition 33 is supported & receives funding from corporate ceo michael weinstein who runs the AHF (aids healthcare foundation), whom the LA times describes as a "slumlord" with a long record of health and safety violations and unfair evictions. this is true! it is also, however, supported mostly by labor unions and nonprofit organizations representing renters and other groups. these include the voter information guide include the california democratic party, the coalition for economic survival, the california nurses association, california alliance of retired americans, the alliance of californians for community empowerment and tenants together. the sheer amount of support prop 33 has from groups & organizations that work to counteract exactly what AHF has been penalized for shows disregarding it entirely because of the organization isn't a choice to be made. more can be found regarding the issues with the AHF here.

“no real guarantee that living conditions will be good” regarding living conditions, let’s first take a look at the status quo: according to the U.S. government accountability office, “An estimated 15 percent of rental units in 2017—more than 5 million—had substantial quality issues (such as cracked walls and the presence of rodents) or lacked essential components of a dwelling (such as heating equipment or hot and cold running water), according to GAO’s analysis of American Housing Survey data. The share of units with deficiencies was relatively stable from 2001 to 2017. Serious deficiencies more often affected households with extremely low incomes or rent burdens. In addition, lower-income households rented approximately two-thirds of the units with substantial quality issues and nearly 80 percent of units lacking essential components.” (source). this argument really only has one thing going for it, but proposition 33 is intended to deal with rent costs and nothing else. there is already an issue with living conditions. proposition 33 being voted either way will do nothing to change this issue. therefore, it’s an irrelevant argument and can thus be disregarded. this is something only further legislation can change.

"prop 33 could decrease property value, contributing to the shortage of housing available" the only source for this that i could find was from the chair of UC berkeley’s fisher center for real estate and urban economics, who appears in a no on 33 ad and has argued that costa hawkins needs to be preserved or construction will slow and landlords will pull rental units off the market. this echoes the view of many economists at California’s elite universities and elsewhere that rent control reduces rental supply, a view that’s backed by some empirical studies. however, other economics and policy researchers see rent control as part of the solution to housing insecurity. according to a report by the federal housing finance agency, “Rent regulations support those who need it most, including those who are not being adequately and safely served by the current set of regulations that provide landlords substantial market power in the housing market"

"proposition 33 eliminates protection for seniors, veterans, and the disabled" this claim is from a no on 33 video ad and is not true. prop 33 doesn’t contain any language regarding seniors and veterans, and the law it would repeal, costa hawkins, doesn’t either. (source)

"proposition 33 weakens renter protections" renter protections, in california specifically, are defined as the right of residential tenants to be protected from certain rent increases and possibly protected from certain types of evictions. (source) proposition 33 is a law regarding rent, not evictions, and thus eviction as part of the definition is irrelevant for this specific case. in looking at this definition, we can clearly see what it promises is in fact only an affect that is increased by prop 33 being put into affect.

"proposition 33 overturns over 100 state affordable housing laws" ken rosen, a UC berkeley business school professor, makes this claim in a no on 33 video ad. opponents of prop 33 argue that it would give cities who don’t want to build housing a way to undercut new development by mandating rents so low that developers couldn’t afford to build. they say that could make it hard to enforce recent state laws aimed at addressing the housing crisis, such as the “builder’s remedy” that relaxes zoning rules in cities whose housing plans haven’t been approved by the state.  a spokesperson in a no on 33 ad claims that “a city would be able to create the economic conditions to basically ignore those laws and requirements," but that’s not the same as repealing those laws. and California courts have held that rent control policies are unconstitutional if they don’t allow landlords to earn “a just and reasonable return on their property” — meaning any city that tries to force landlords to charge obviously unfeasible rents could face legal challenges.

"prop 33 would repeal the strongest rent control law in the nation" no on 33 campaign ads make this claim, saying the proposition would erase california’s “progress on housing” by getting rid of a law signed by governor gavin newsom. newsom signed a law in 2019 that caps rent increases in california at 5% plus the rate of inflation, or a maximum of 10%. prop 33 in fact doesn’t repeal this law, which is set to expire in 2030. it would, however, add this sentence to state law: “The state may not limit the right of any city, county, or city and county to maintain, enact, or expand residential rent control.”  proponents say cities need this flexibility to keep annual rent increases below 10%, a rate they say still puts a big burden on tenants. (source)

so, to summarize: proposition 33 is a law proposed that would repeal a law previously passed, which, if passed, will allow cities control over how high landlords can charge their rent. over 5 million californians spend more than half their income on rent alone. proposition 33 is a proposed legislation that deals specifically with rent prices being high. while there are many incredibly significant with things other than simply the rent when you look at the california housing situation, this law is incapable of dealing with them. what prop 33 does do is effectively provide a solution to the constant rent increases many tenants face regularly. the housing crisis in california is solvable, and proposition 33 is a step towards that.

[thomasthetankieengine]

This would be funnier if prominent Tankie men on this site, such as pissvortex, brendanicus/yuri-alexeygaybitch, and archeocommunologist/sober-communist, didn't have such long histories of thinking their leftist politics makes them immune from being misogynistic.

Far from confined to them, misogyny in Leftist movements has a long history. Indeed, much of Second Wave Feminism was driven by women who were frustrated with their sexism of male leaders of the male leftists leaders of 60's and 70's. For example?

Revolutionary movements, often preaching violence and imbued with machismo, lend themselves easily to chauvinism. Andreas Baader, who formed an eponymous West German terrorist organization in 1970 with feminist journalist Ulrike Meinhof, spoke of all women as “cunts.” Like Baader, who would be remembered solely as a criminal had he not adopted a revolutionary political agenda to justify his gang’s murder and bombing spree, the leaders of the Black Panther Party preached a more equitable world while subjugating the women in their midst. The party newspaper railed against abortion as “a victory for the oppressive ruling class who will use [abortion] to kill off Black and other oppressed people before they are born,” and the birth control pill as “another type of genocide that the power structure has poured into the Black community.” It once expelled a member for terminating a pregnancy, and according to historian Kate Coleman, the group “punished rank-and-file females for even minor ‘infractions’ by turning them out as prostitutes.” In his memoir Soul on Ice, Panther “Minister of Information” Eldridge Cleaver wrote of how he viewed rape as an “insurrectionary act.” After he “practiced” on black women, he moved onto white ones, as “it delighted me that I was defying and trampling upon the white man's law, upon his system of values, and that I was defiling his women.” Panther Party co-founder and “Minister of Defense” Huey Newton talked a good game when it came to female equality, publishing a letter in the party newspaper reproving sexism (and homophobia) and declaring “we recognize the women’s right to be free.” Yet Newton authorized the beating of the woman who managed the Panther Liberation School after she reprimanded a male colleague. Oh, and he murdered a 17-year-old prostitute because she referred to him as “baby.” ... As long as there has been misogyny on the left, women feminists have fought it. In 1970 -- the same year Andreas Baader founded his revolutionary cell and Leonard Bernstein was introducing Upper East Side society matrons to the Black Panthers – the feminist writer Robin Morgan wrote a groundbreaking essay entitled, “Goodbye to All That.” Taking on “the good guys who think they know what ‘Women’s Lib,’ as they so chummily call it, is all about – and who then proceed to degrade and destroy women by almost everything they say and do,” Morgan wrote that, “it hurts to understand that at Woodstock or Altamont a woman could be declared uptight or a poor sport if she didn’t want to be raped.” She attacked the Weathermen, the American analogue to Baader-Meinhof, “with the Stanley Kowalski image and theory of free sexuality but practice of sex on demand for males,” and the patriarchal attitudes prevalent among New Left organizations more broadly, waving “goodbye to the dream that being in the leadership collective will get you anything but gonorrhea.” 47 years later, her critique could be applied to Harvey Weinstein, who earnestly seemed to believe, at least in his initial apology, that a series of random liberal bromides condemning Donald Trump and the NRA immunized him from the charge of sexism.

[is-the-owl-video-cute]

Ok so we all know hp is bad and hp fans are genuinely sus and Not Good people..But are fans of other things such as twilight, mcu, certain horror movies with awful directors, or even things such as rock singers in the 80s who made amazing music but they were Awful. Can people enjoy these things and still be a good person? I've wondered this for a bit and your hp reply was great!

The questions you have to ask yourself are “is [bad person] benefitting from me engaging with this media in some way” and “is [bad person] actively using their success in media as a way to fight for legislature that oppresses a marginalized group”. You also have to analyze if the media itself reflects whatever makes the creator bad.

JKR is a unique case because she uses profits from Harry Potter to fund hate groups and push anti-trans legislation into law. She uses her platform specifically as a means to harm other human beings actively, and her works are rife with racism, antisemitism, sexism, fatphobia, ableism, etc. etc.

It isn’t just a matter of JKR having a bad opinion, she weaponizes her media to groom her fans into TERFs and is directly placing trans people in danger, especially in the UK.

Fans of movies made by Harvey Weinstein or whoever are generally not being groomed to be sexually abusive because he wasn’t using his media as a weapon, he was using his money as a weapon for harm. Do I think people are inherently bad for liking Pulp Fiction or whatever just because the executive producer is a sexual abuser? Not really, because for one thing he’s in prison and can no longer benefit from any profit that movie could make and for another he was just the executive producer for most of the movies you’ve actually heard of, not a writer or director. Death of the author works a whole lot easier if the author is actually dead or otherwise off the table, and how tainted the media is by their involvement is proportional to how involved they actually were with the media.

So something like Mindless Self Indulgence is hard to justify still engaging with even though Jimmy was arrested because he was the direct artistic influence for his music and had more or less full creative freedom with it. I wouldn’t personally say it reflects great on a person to enjoy art made by a known child molester, but that doesn’t mean you have to hate Spy Kids or whatever just because someone on a very large team of people involved who didn’t really have creative control on the project was a bad person.

It’s case by case with a lot of reliance on using best judgment.

[beardedmrbean]

A Black Harvard law professor has been accused of tweeting, then deleting, the word "Karma" in an apparent response to Claudine Gay announcing her resignation as president of the university following accusations of plagiarism and a row over campus antisemitism.

The post was allegedly made on X, formerly Twitter, by Professor Ronald Sullivan Jr., who in 2019 was effectively demoted after serving as part of Harvey Weinstein's defense team when the disgraced film producer was facing sexual assault allegations.

Political commentator Wesley Yang shared what he claimed was a screenshot of Gay's post, adding: "Ronald Sullivan deleted this one word post written in response to former Harvard president Claudine Gay's resignation: 'Karma.'"

Newsweek could not immediately verify the veracity of the screenshot's content or that the tweet was directly related to Gay's resignation.

Newsweek has reached out to Sullivan and Harvard University for comment via email.

Sullivan's decision to represent Weinstein sparked a furious response from some students, after which Harvard decided not to extend his contract as an undergraduate residence faculty dean. According to student-run newspaper The Harvard Crimson, Gay, then dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, was one of those involved in the decision.

Gay announced she was stepping down as Harvard president on January 2, with a letter in which she claimed it was "in the best interests" of the university for her to resign after facing what she described as "personal attacks and threats fueled by racial animus."

It came amid an ongoing row over free speech and bigotry on campuses, which had already claimed the job of Liz Magill, who resigned as president of Pennsylvania University last month following a controversial House committee appearance alongside Gay and Sally Kornbluth, president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Sullivan faced protests on campus after The New York Post first reported he had joined Weinstein's defense team in January 2019, with demonstrators demanding he step down as faculty dean and for a public apology be issued.

Weinstein was later convicted of rape and sexual assault in the New York trial and sentenced to 23 years in prison. He was subsequently sentenced to an additional 16 years in prison by a court in Los Angeles in a separate case.

In response to the controversy, Sullivan sent a 1,200-word email to students at Winthrop, then his undergraduate faculty residence, stressing the importance of representing an "unpopular defendant."

In an interview with The Harvard CrimsonGay branded Sullivan's response to the row as "insufficient," and months later it was announced his position as Winthrop faculty dean would not be renewed.

Within hours of Hamas's October 7 attack on Israel, which resulted in around 1,200 people killed and another 240 taken into Gaza as hostages, 34 Harvard student organizations signed a statement written by the university's Undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Committee stating they "hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence."

The move triggered a furious response from the university's Jewish center Harvard Hillel, which said the statement promoted "hatred and antisemitism."

Appearing before a House committee in December, alongside Magill and Kornbluth, Gay was asked whether "calling for the genocide of Jews violates Harvard code of conduct" by Rep. Elise Stefanik.

She replied "it depends on the context," sparking outrage and calls for her to resign. Speaking to The Harvard Crimson, Gay later apologized for her remarks, and said: "Calls for violence or genocide against the Jewish community, or any religious or ethnic group, are vile, they have no place at Harvard."

In December it was revealed Gay was facing an anonymous complaint of serial plagiarism, with additional allegations published by the Washington Free Beacon in January.

She initially denied any wrongdoing in response, stating: "I stand by the integrity of my scholarship." However, The New York Times reported that a Harvard investigation concluded there were cases of inadequate citation in her dissertation as well as at least two of her articles.

[pandemic-info]

Staring at the tsunami - by Nate Bear - ¡Do Not Panic!

In the 1980s researcher Neil Weinstein identified what he called unrealistic optimism. In Weinstein’s experiment, people were given a variety of bad outcomes (ill health, tragic accident) and asked to rank their chance of the bad thing happening to them versus the chance that thing would happen to someone similar to them. In almost all cases people believed the bad thing was more likely to happen to others and less likely to happen to them.

...

But by the law of probabilities, this can’t be true. Not everyone can be less likely to experience a particular bad outcome. We can’t all be top quartile. Weinstein identified four cognitive factors contributing to unrealistic optimism. 1. Lack of personal experience with the problem/bad thing 2. Belief that if the problem hasn’t yet appeared it will never appear in the future 3. Belief that the problem is uncommon 4. Belief that the problem is preventable by individual action

...

[The] freeze response is well-documented in other disasters. The passengers whose plane crashed on the runway and stayed strapped into their seats, reassuring each other everything would be fine before they burned to death. The workers in the south tower who returned calmly to their offices on September 11th and watched with their own eyes as flames poured from the huge gaping hole punched in the building across from them. Everything about these situations should have screamed run. But in their novelty and sudden out-of-context appearance, some people found it impossible to readjust their ideas about the future. Cognitively, they found it easier to fall back on an old mental model of the world and their experience of that world than adjust the model in the face of immediate, observable realities.

...

[In a 2011 update to Weinstein's experiment], researchers twice asked people to rate their likelihood of eighty disturbing things happening to them. On their first go, the subjects weren’t told how often statistically these events happened in the real world. The second time, they were. The researchers found that on both occasions people underestimated the chance of the bad thing happening to them, and over-estimated the likelihood of a more favourable outcome. In other words, even knowing how likely they were to experience a negative event didn’t make people any more likely to believe it would happen to them personally.

Unlike in Weinstein’s experiment, subjects were hooked up to an MRI, giving us a more detailed understanding of what was going on in the brain. And it turns out we may be programmed for optimism. The researchers found that those who wrongly assessed their risk levels experienced “diminishing coding in a region in the frontal cortex.” They concluded that “the human propensity toward optimism is facilitated by the brain's failure to code errors in estimation when those call for pessimistic updates. This failure results in selective updating, which supports unrealistic optimism that is resistant to change.”

But the experiment also revealed something else. It revealed that some people did code for errors in estimation. One group of people did have the ability to over-ride innate optimism and accurately calculate risk - the clinically depressed.

& This response on Twitter lmao:

Key words for search: tsunami, optimism bias, "won't be me", psychology,

[brian-in-finance]

Lawsuit Accuses Former Associate of Harvey Weinstein of Rape

A former model has filed a suit against Fabrizio Lombardo and Disney.

Fabrizio Lombardo, the former head of Miramax in Italy and a close associate of Harvey Weinstein, has been accused of rape in a lawsuit filed on April 6 in New York State Supreme Court. The suit was brought by Sara Ziff, a former model and the founder of the Model Alliance, an advocacy group for models and fashion creatives.

The suit alleges that Mr. Lombardo, assaulted Ms. Ziff in a New York City hotel in 2001 when she was 19.

Ms. Ziff is suing Mr. Lombardo, as well as Mr. Weinstein, Disney and its subsidiaries Buena Vista and Miramax, for abuse and negligence under the Adult Survivors Act. The A.S.A., which was passed in May 2022, extended, until November 2023, the rights of sex crime victims to bring civil claims that would otherwise have expired under the statute of limitations.

Mr. Lombardo — whom Mr. Weinstein once credited with saving his life and whose 2003 wedding involved Mr. Weinstein as his best man — often figured on the sidelines of the many stories about Mr. Weinstein’s predations on young women. He was named in the sexual harassment class action suit brought against the Weinstein Company and numerous related entities in October 2018. But this is the first time he himself has been accused of sexual assault in a court of law.

It is also the first time Ms. Ziff has spoken publicly about her own experience, despite being instrumental in helping others tell their stories of sexual abuse, specifically creating a help line for survivors at the Model Alliance.

“It’s taken over 20 years to process this,” she said in an interview in advance of filing the suit. “I couldn’t even talk to anyone about it for the first few years, let alone imagine taking legal action.” When the A.S.A. was passed, however, she said she began to reconsider.

Efforts to reach Mr. Lombardo were unsuccessful. Disney did not respond to emails and phone calls requesting comment.

Imran H. Ansari, a lawyer for Harvey Weinstein, wrote in an email: “Certainly Mr. Weinstein had no control over any alleged conduct by Mr. Lombardo, nor would he have any reason to know what Mr. Lombardo was doing nor where Mr. Lombardo was at the time that Ms. Ziff alleges she was raped. As such, Mr. Weinstein firmly denies that he has any liability for the alleged conduct of another.” (Mr. Weinstein was sentenced to a combined 39 years in prison for sex crimes in New York and Los Angeles.)

According to the lawsuit, Ms. Ziff met Mr. Lombardo in 2001 when she was considering becoming an actress; her agents brokered the meeting. Mr. Lombardo later invited her to a screening of a Miramax movie and said it would be a chance to meet Mr. Weinstein, then at the height of his power in Hollywood.

After the screening, the lawsuit says, Mr. Lombardo invited Ms. Ziff for a drink at the Mercer and said both Mr. Weinstein and his brother, Bob, would be there. When Ms. Ziff arrived, Mr. Lombardo brought her to a penthouse suite, with no one else present.

The lawsuit says that after making advances and being told by Ms. Ziff she had a boyfriend, Mr. Lombardo “pivoted her around onto the bed on her back,” lay on top of her and raped her.

“Ms. Ziff was in shock and lay in the bed, frozen. Mr. Lombardo fell asleep. Ms. Ziff woke up early the next morning, confused and alone in the hotel room. She walked home to her apartment, took a long shower, and cried,” the suit reads. The suit also says Ms. Ziff did not speak about the rape to anyone at the time. A few years later she told a fellow model, Caitriona Balfe (now an actress), about the assault.

Ms. Balfe confirmed that Ms. Ziff had told her about the rape during a fashion show season in Milan around 2005.

Ms. Balfe said she and Ms. Ziff never thought about making it public. “We were so young, and the crazy thing is as models we were being put in these really compromising situations all the time, and you just kind of accepted them,” Ms. Balfe said.

Now 40, and the mother of a young daughter, Ms. Ziff acknowledged that while her experience may have shaped her decision to go into advocacy and become the public face of models’ rights, she herself had been reluctant to do what she helped other models do.

“I feel more comfortable focusing on the discussions around policy,” she said. She and the Model Alliance are currently working on a new bill, the Fashion Workers Act, which focuses on regulating management agencies in order to prevent these abuses from happening. Co-sponsored by State Senator Brad Hoylman, the bill was introduced in the New York state legislature last year and will be reconsidered during the upcoming legislative session, after it was not passed the first time.

However, Ms. Ziff said, she had spent the last decade talking to other survivors, and in helping other people, she began to feel it was “the responsible thing” to come forward.

“I’ve been very anxious about it and at times wondered if I even want to go through this process,” she said. “I’ve spoken to other people who’ve gone through it and every single one of them says it’s a nightmare. But no matter how much I’ve tried to ignore it or minimize it, this is not my burden to hold.”

In 2017 Ms. Ziff filed a report with the New York City Police Department, though it did not lead to any charges. That was the year Mr. Lombardo was accused by four women, including the actress Asia Argento and the model Zoe Brock, of being Mr. Weinstein’s enabler — and employed by Miramax in part for that purpose. Mr. Lombardo emphatically denied the allegations in an interview with The New York Times.

Mr. Lombardo never appeared in court during the class action suit, and it was later settled as part of the Weinstein Company bankruptcy filing.

“I’ve always been frustrated by the fact that those people seem to escape any kind of accountability,” Ms. Ziff said. She said that when the A.S.A. was passed, she remembered going to the bill signing with the governor and with other women she had come to know over the years who had spoken out about their abuse and trauma.

“It felt like here was a real sense of possibility that perhaps we could do something about what happened,” she said, “even if it happened a very long time ago.”

Vanessa Friedman has been the fashion director and chief fashion critic for The Times since 2014. In this role she covers global fashion for both The New York Times and International New York Times. @VVFriedman

New York Times 7 April 2023

Remember… I’ve spoken to other people who’ve gone through it and every single one of them says it’s a nightmare. But no matter how much I’ve tried to ignore it or minimize it, this is not my burden to hold. — Sara Ziff

[nastya-sokolova-2002]

Two characters in one day, why not👀

Full name: Linus Necronomicon Ichabodovich

Date of birth: October 1, 1905

Character: kind, shy, brave, caring, sometimes naive

Loves: his family, his friends, his talent for potions, helping others, talking to spirits

He does not like: when he or someone from his family is offended, raise his tone, lose his family, loneliness, feel unnecessary to anyone

Russian voice acting: Mikhail Khrustalev (speech), Dzhigan (real name of the singer Denis Alexandrovich Ustimenko-Weinstein) (vocals)

English voice acting: Richard Butler (singer from the music group "Love spit love")

First appearance in Fanon: The fifth chapter in the fanfiction "SCP Foundation: The Last Pages of History" (as a story)

Last appearance in Fanon: Currently unknown

Story: Linus grew up with his single mother named Gertrude, who is a sorceress and a potion maker. He inherited only his appearance from his father, and the color of his fur and eyes from his mother. From the age of five, he felt that he had discovered a gift for potions (like Gertrude and her father). Before he left his mother just because he had friends (before his birth, Gertrude killed all the mice in Los Angeles until she married Ichabod (he is an ordinary mouse like Pinky and Brain's family), but you know specifically about this in the post about Gertrude), He was talking to his father's spirit. After he got to Burbank, he began to live in the cemetery, continuing to communicate with spirits. When he decided to walk around the city, he noticed Linda, who was singing on stage. At first glance, he thought she was a pretty mouse, but he was too shy to get to know her. The next day, he met her by chance and started walking with her. After a few days, he began to feel that he loved her more than his friend. One day, when Linda also felt love for him, she sheltered him and told him that her parents were not against it and that they really liked him. Later, he and Linda had a daughter, Bella. Linus was very happy until Jasper found out about it and kicked him out of town. After being exiled, not knowing where to go next, he decided to go to a place where the mouse's foot had not yet stepped on, and ends up on an island called the Island of Unnecessary Mice. There he also began to live in the cemetery, or he again felt that he did not need anyone. Later, he meets two mice named Fedya and Zakhar, who became his best friends. When he saw that his friends also had their own girls, he sadly remembered Linda and realized that he would not have a girlfriend here. But suddenly he accidentally meets a lonely mouse named Faina, who lives with her mother Willow and younger brother Bahram. He also thought she was a pretty mouse, but decided that he did not want to risk having love with her, but Faina fell in love with him at first sight and considered him a wonderful male and thought about him every day. A little later, Faina herself invites him on a "date", which he does not refuse. After that, Linus also falls in love with her and also wants to ask her out on a date, but he can't. Fedya and Zakhar help him with this. After he confessed his love to Faina, Linus marries her and lives with her. Soon they have a daughter, Sheila, and Fedya and his wife, Heidi, have a son, Henry. Next, Zakhar and his wife Tabitha have twin sons named Lukum and Rahat. At this time, Bahram starts living alone and works as a banker. Five years later, Linus and Faina have a son named Orm. But after the birth of Orm, a terrible thing happens. Out of nowhere, a Snowy Wind arrives on the island and takes Faina back to where it came from. Linus first went to his mother and asked her to take care of his daughter Sheila, as he alone could not cope with his children. Sheila initially did not want to leave her father, especially her younger brother, but Linus said he would always be there for her. And he gave Orm to his mother-in-law Willow, but she asked him about himself, and he replied that he would leave and promised her that she would not tell Orm, who when he grows up, about his parents and older sister. Willow promised him. Linus goes to the cemetery, says his one last phrase and committed suicide in order to be with his wife in the next world and watch his children with her. And then, almost throughout the fifth chapter, he appears as a story in the form of a spirit.

Interesting facts: Linus and his father Ichabod are the very first mice that look like Brain, but in Pinky's family.

[gwydionmisha]

CW: Domestic Abuse

[madamtrashbat]

California Voters:

Please read up on Prop 34 before you vote (if you haven't already)

The commercials for it (and, ostensibly, against prop 33) are couched in all this language about misuse of tax funds and about standing up for the people against those who would use tax money for their own gains. It is assuredly not this.

Prop 33 is the latest ballot measure about introducing rent control in the state, spearheaded (again) by the AIDS Health Foundation president Michael Weinstein. He's tried to do this a few different times, and the people who put forward Prop 34 (mostly, landlords) hate him.

Prop 34 is written as if this is a broad stroke measure about the use of money in non-profits, but this, taken directly from the CalMatters website, is the whole story:

Because Michael Weinstein keeps trying to introduce broader rent control to the state, the landlords have risen up to try and kneecap his foundation specifically, to prevent him from furthering his fight for rent control if it doesn't pass this time around.

Whatever your opinions are on Prop 33, they're largely irrelevant to the fact that a group of disgruntled landlords who want to not be restricted any further on what they can charge for shitty houses and apartments are trying to mislead the California populace into eliminating their current main opponent.

Prop 34 might as well be titled "Make it so Michael Weinstein Can't be Involved in Politics Anymore Because We Hate Him."

That's fucking gross. It is wildly unethical to introduce a law that is aimed at one person and one person only, dressed up in fancy, progressive language about money-saving and care for the taxpayers.

I urge you to please vote no on Prop 34. It's a slimy, underhanded proposition, and it should not pass.

Do what you see fit for Prop 33.

[ivankahasbeentreatedsounfairly]

The man, Philip Esformes, was charged with two felony counts that could result in jail time and fines if he were convicted, according to a public records database maintained by Miami-Dade County.

Mr. Esformes is at least the seventh person granted clemency by Mr. Trump who has been charged with new crimes after receiving a second chance, according to a New York Times analysis.

Mr. Esformes is also the third known recipient of a clemency grant from Mr. Trump to be charged with a domestic violence-related offense.

Late on Saturday, Mr. Esformes verbally threatened a woman whom her relatives described as his wife, as well as a second family member, and further intimidated them by breaking items on a table filled with glassware, according to the woman’s relatives.

Mr. Esformes pushed the table toward one of the family members, according to the relatives, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to protect the family.

Mr. Esformes tried to prevent the woman from calling the police by smashing her cellphone, the relatives said. The woman ran out of the house and called for help, they said. No one appears to have been injured in the incident.

Records accessible on the website of the Miami-Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitation Department show that he was booked in the early morning on Sunday — his 56th birthday — on charges of tampering with a victim or witness and criminal mischief involving property damage of $1,000 or more. The website indicates that the two charges relate to domestic violence but provides no other details.

Corrections officials in Miami-Dade County indicated that he was still in custody on Monday morning.

Mr. Esformes owned more than 30 Miami-area nursing homes and assisted-living centers in 2016, when he was charged in connection with a two-decade scheme that involved an estimated $1.3 billion worth of fraudulent claims to Medicare and Medicaid. The Justice Department called it the largest health care fraud scheme ever charged. He was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison in 2019.

His prison term ended suddenly in December 2020 — when Mr. Trump, during his final days in office, commuted what remained of Mr. Esformes’s sentence. In a statement announcing the commutation, the White House claimed that in prison, Mr. Esformes had been “in declining health” and “had been devoted to prayer and repentance.”

His path to a commutation was emblematic of the unusual way Mr. Trump administered executive clemency, which is among the most unilateral, unchecked powers of the Oval Office. Mr. Trump largely bypassed a Justice Department system set up to identify and vet worthy recipients of commutations, which reduce or eliminate prison sentences, and pardons, which wipe conviction records.

Instead, Mr. Trump relied on recommendations from a relatively small circle of allies and supporters.

Mr. Esformes’s commutation was not recommended by the Justice Department. It was supported by influential figures and groups in Mr. Trump’s world, including a Jewish nonprofit group called the Aleph Institute that advances prisoners’ rights. The group worked with the White House and Trump allies on clemency and legislation that overhauled sentencing laws. A lawyer who worked with the Aleph Institute lobbied the White House to grant clemency to Mr. Esformes, enlisting help from conservative legal luminaries including two former U.S. attorneys general, Edwin Meese and Michael Mukasey, according to The Washington Post.

The Aleph Institute also worked with the famed defense lawyer Alan M. Dershowitz, who said he had recommended that the group pursue clemency for Mr. Esformes.

Mr. Dershowitz supported commutations for two other recipients who have faced new charges — Jonathan Braun, who pleaded not guilty in August to assaulting his wife and punching his 75-year-old father-in-law in the head; and Eliyahu Weinstein, who is set to stand trial next month on charges that he bilked dozens of associates out of $35 million.

Mr. Dershowitz said in an interview on Monday that he did not regret his clemency advocacy under Mr. Trump. While he conceded that the process under Mr. Trump “was probably too personal” and “a little too permissive,” he said the Justice Department’s process “seems like it was a little too impermissive.”

Generally, he said, “when you’re dealing with people who have committed crimes, you are going to get some recidivism, but the focus shouldn’t be only on those who have failed or those who have recidivated.” Mr. Dershowitz added: “Many of the commutations that he gave turned out wonderfully. People went back to their lives, went back to their families and contributed to their communities.”

The Aleph Institute did not respond to requests for comment.

Mr. Esformes’s family donated tens of thousands of dollars to the group over several years starting after his indictment, the institute previously told The Times, asserting that the donations had nothing to do with its support for clemency. The group subsequently told The Post that it had refunded the donations to Mr. Esformes’s family.

Months after the commutation, prosecutors moved to retry Mr. Esformes on six counts from his initial indictment on which the jury had deadlocked. Mr. Esformes’s representatives claimed that the unusual move was retribution from President Biden’s Justice Department to reverse the effect of Mr. Trump’s clemency grants — complaints that were embraced by influential Trump supportersand others.

Prosecutors argued that the commutation did not affect the six counts.

Mr. Esformes pleaded guilty in February to one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud to avoid another trial. The Justice Department agreed to drop the remaining counts. He was credited for time already served and given no additional prison time.

Paul E. Pelletier, a former federal prosecutor from Florida who worked on Medicare fraud among medical clinics, said that he remained disappointed that Mr. Esformes’s criminal sentence was commuted and that he was not surprised to see that he was facing new charges.

The New York Times

By Kenneth P. Vogel and Eric Lipton

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/14/us/politics/philip-esformes-trump-clemency-recipient-new-charges.html

[impossibleperfectionnerd]

NATO basic let me remind you guys: to negotiate already: bit by bit then ALL - 1 month period 1. all land titles- core land titles (145) ex. Sta. Mesa office, San Juan city home, NAVOTAS, folgueras, there are 2 - 4th st. San Miguel Manila (near San BEda college), paranaque, Ayala alabang properties, binan, Laguna, pasay city. Batangas (talibeach area)…tip of the iceberg. 2. Full receipt of NATO aid- primary- 15,000 euro per day for myself & only & cents & pennies from UST priests 25 cents a day from the priesthood. P6000 per month from the New Vatican state as it’s prime deity. To back it up- for NATO not to have a hard time timewise - Salaries from my banking businesses worldwide as bank owner (110)- 1.2M euro each per month and as law firm owner & accounting firm owner (110) - Dentons (Swiss international law firm)/SGV & co. (Filipino world class accounting firm)/Deloitte (French accounting firm)/Grant Thornton) a. Credit suisse b. UBS c. Sarasin d. Mirabaud group e. Migros group f. Banque Cantonale de Geneve g. Banque Cantonale de Vaudoise h. Vontobel I. Swiss National government bank j.Julius Baer Group k.EFG international l.Pictet Group m.Lombard Odier n.Intessa San Paolo 0. BMP p. CDP Italy q. Sella bank r. PostFinance s. Habib bank (Swiss) - not Muslim! t. Revolut (France) u. Unicredit- (France) v. Chinabank (Capitol commons branch) w. Security bank (Capitol commons) X. BDO (Rockwell the Grove & Silver city pasig & main branch in Makati & BDO corporate center) y. Eastwest bank z. Landbank UP diliman - z1. AUB (Asia United bank) - Ortigas center z2. Lloyd’s of London z3. Barclay’s bank z4. PSbank z5. Metrobank (tiendesitas area & main near San Miguel ave. Ortigas center) z6. BNP Paribas (Italy) z7. Mendiolanum (Italy) z8. Banco Al veneto centrale (Italy) z9. HSBC (UK) z10. Standard chartered bank (UK) z11. Harrod’s bank (UK) z12. Bank of America (USA) z13. Bank of Tennesee (USA) z14. Washington mutual (USA) z15. Citibank group (USA) z16. Goldman Sachs (USA) z17. Wells Fargo (USA) z18. TRB (USA) z19. Desjardins of Canada z20. Royal bank of Canada z21. Bank of England z22. Scotiabank z23. TDbank z24. ANZ z25. Philippine National Bank (PNB) z26. Unilever z27. Coca Cola company z28. Unionbank z29. RCBC z30. Philtrust bank z31. Chase z32. Morgan Stanley z33. Carnegie Mellon bank z34. New York stock exchange z35. Hong Kong stock exchanges z36. Mainland China stock exchanges z37. Swiss stock exchange z38. Italian stock exchange z39. British stock exchange z40. NASA z41. X or Twitter z42. Tumblr z43.APPLE z44. European space academy z45. Various military schools- MILAC (premier Swiss military school) & Royal academy of sandhurst (United Kingdom) & Karlberg military academy (Sweden) & premier Belgium military school (Belgium) & Benedictine military school (Kansas, USA), premier California military school (San Luis obispo), westpoint (Virginia). Premier Italian military school (Naples) - Yale standard/ non - Yale standard (UST working level style) (Naples). St. Cyr military school (France). Z46. Hewlett-Packard z47. H and M & ikea & swedabank z48. Louis Vuitton/Harrod’s/Chanel/balenciaga/van cleef arpels/Cartier/Tiffany’s/bulgari/ z49. SM z50. Microsoft z51. Warner brothers/Weinstein company/MGM/Marvel comics z52.EPSON z53. Union bancaire privee (UBP Switzerland) z54. Banque Luxembourg z55. 7-11 z56. UERM & Veterans bank & Phoenix oil, our lady of Lourdes hospital, Philippine law school, Arellano law school. z57.General Motors Z58. McDo Z59. Swiss broadcasting corp. Z60. Vatican News z61. Keystone SDA (Swiss media) z62. BBC worldwide per country z63. SpaceX (USA) z64. Bucca de Beppo Italian restaurant Z65. Marugame Udon z66. Asakusa z67. Tartufo z68. RPN 9 z69. UST law school z70. GMA 7 3. 1 small car - Chevrolet mini hatchback 🚗. British Mini cooper (not more than P1.5M in value)- green in color or black in color

[somebeltwaytrash]

"Believe women" was the rallying cry of activists in the wake of sexual assault allegations against Harvey Weinstein and others.

We did and we do, but here's the thing: Believing women is only the start of a very long process. Believing women does not eliminate the necessity for, and legal right to, a thorough investigation by law enforcement. Believing women does not change the laws about filing charges, getting a case to trial, going through that trial, reaching a verdict, and punishing the guilty.

All of that still has to happen.

Just because someone is accused of a crime by a member of a marginalized group does not mean the accused is guilty. When you pile on, you're as big a predator as any rapist.

It is also true that insufficient evidence of criminal activity doesn't mean the accused did not harm the accuser. If this is the case, the accuser can sue for compensatory damages in civil court.

Here in America, we saw this strategy pursued successfully when E. Jean Carroll sued Donald Trump for damages relating to a long-standing sexual assault.

Carroll won that case, and the subsequent case she brought when Trump defamed her in regard to her first case.

Now. Those of you -- journos, pundits, fangirls, fanboys, and the like -- who aren't from the US, shut the fuck up. You don't understand how our justice system works, and it's plain you couldn't care less. Take your fascist systems where accusation is synonymous with guilt, and shove 'em. We don't care how "justice" works in your country; we won't be changing our system just because you make ugly, defamatory noises.

As for the rest of you, just wait. If you don't like the way our system works, study it, and learn how to change it. Then, get to work. You can protest peacefully in several ways -- even if you're not old enough to vote. Good luck -- we admire the hell out of you.

[meeksimpactlaw]

Car Accident Lawyers Burrow & Associates

These pointers embody following written guidelines for workplace safety, reporting any harm within 30 days, and accepting affordable medical and rehabilitation providers. Your claim must show that you weren't negligent or willful when you suffered the damage. Being concerned in a car accident can be complicated and sophisticated. Getting correct medical consideration must be your first priority, and we may help you find certified doctors. After your emergency medical wants are addressed, contact us at certainly one of our locations. Our attorneys will come to you even if you're in the hospital.

Working with a personal damage lawyer, such as Attorney Anita Lamar, is essential to making sure that you simply receive full and honest compensation. Lamar Law Office’s experienced group is committed to providing our shoppers with unmatched customer support. We know that legal processes can add stress on high of a stressful, life-altering car accident. At Lamar Law Office, we offer greater than legal services… We Care. Ultimately, a legal group is going to be probably the most useful throughout this time, as they perceive how law works and the method to use it for the benefit of their clients. We have seen the method in which that folks get hurt because one other driver selected to be careless that day.

Most importantly, we will drive the insurance firm to compensate you fairly for your losses. Since we deal with car accident instances each single day, all day long, we all know exactly tips on georgia car accident lawyers how to navigate a claim. The insurance firm will gladly reap the benefits of your inexperience if you're not represented by a knowledgeable car accident attorney.

High-speed collisions might crumple a automobile and trigger traumatic inside accidents to passengers, such as inner bleeding, ruptured organs, or organ perforation due to broken ribs. Distracted driving, texting while driving, working a vehicle under the influence, or bad weather. The use of this form doesn't establish an attorney-client relationship. Once once more, Westmoreland Law has been acknowledged car accident lawyers in ga by its peers as part of an elite group of approximately 10 % of all attorneys who hold an AV Preeminent Rating. An AV Preeminent Rating is a designation trusted worldwide by buyers and referrers of authorized providers. "Mr. Hinson dealt with a personal harm matter for me. He kept me nicely knowledgeable and did a wonderful job. I was more than happy with the result."

But non-economic damages are intangible losses which may be fully subjective. Here’s what the lawyers at The Weinstein Firm advise you to do after a car accident. Before beginning his apply in the representation of injured people, Mr. Muller served the group as an Assistant District Attorney... Did you know georgia car accident lawyer that motorized vehicle accidents are the leading cause of damage deaths and the second main reason for hospital and ER visits in Georgia? We don't need to let you know how devastating a car crash may be, particularly in a bustling city like Atlanta.

It is okay to say at the scene of the accident that you're uncertain or unsure but relating to the extent of your injuries. Our expertise handling claims in Atlanta, GA has led us to valuable know-how. From gathering proof to coping with the opposing insurance firm or celebration, you'll have the ability to belief us with each element of your car crash claim. We will seek fair compensation and guarantee ga car accident lawyer the best consequence of your case, due to our dedication, ability, and experience. Your private damage declare is necessary to us, and we'll use all obtainable resources to ensure you are fairly represented during the process. Protect your authorized rights right now by enlisting the services of a reliable car accident law agency in Atlanta, GA.

Sometimes the whipping of your neck or again in a car accident can harm one of the discs that serves as a pad between the bony vertebrae of your spine. This can lead to a herniated disc or ruptured disc, typically called a spinal herniation or slipped disc. The different party could additionally be liable in your harm if they have car accident lawyer georgia been at fault. Even if you exchanged insurance coverage data with the opposite driver, it doesn’t imply you’re at fault. In some instances, additional time may be out there to file a claim. If you need a  lawyer to represent you or a family member, simply make one name to Kenneth S. Nugent, P.C.

You may injure your wrists should you brace your self during the impact and put all your weight on them. All insurance collected when the at-fault driver brought on a collision resulting in the client’s punctured lung. An exception exists if a fatal accident victim’s household wish to file a wrongful death declare. In this case, they might have up to 2 years after the date of the victim’s death to file a lawsuit. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), roughly 9 people are killed and more than 1,000 individuals are injured every day in accidents that contain a distracted driver. Distracted driving can be any activity that attracts a motorist’s consideration away from the street.

[arpov-blog-blog]

The Georgia Law permits participants in the rarely use 'Special Investigative Grand Jury to comment on any related issues except their actual deliberation. So don't listen to so called experts who have not served as prosecutors in Georgia. Federal standards to not apply. Emily Kohrs could have legally named Trump, and a host of others who were recommended for indictment but she did not....."The interviews by Kohrs could create public relations headaches for prosecutors already navigating a politically polarizing investigation.

"It's bad optics," said legal expert Clark Neily of the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington. "It makes the process look unfair to targets of the grand jury, even though it doesn't provide grounds for quashing an indictment."

The special grand jury heard testimony behind closed doors including from Trump allies such as Republican U.S. Senator Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and attorney Rudy Giuliani. Excerpts of its findings released on Feb. 16 showed that the panel concluded that some witnesses may have lied under oath.

But the grand jury lacked indictment powers. Fani Willis, the Fulton County district attorney steering the investigation, must decide whether to bring the panel's charging recommendations to a regular grand jury. That extra step would further insulate prosecutors from any accusations of grand juror misconduct based on the Kohrs interviews, legal experts said.

"There still has to be an independent assessment by the district attorney and a subsequent grand jury who hands up the indictment," Weinstein said.

A spokesperson for Willis' office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It is rare for judges to dismiss indictments based on breaches of grand jury protocols, which require proof that panelists were prejudiced or engaged in egregious misconduct that would make a fair trial impossible, experts said.

Cooke, whose time in the Fulton County DA's office overlapped with Willis's service as a prosecutor before she became district attorney, expressed confidence in the fairness of the process.

"Any grand jury in Fulton County is going to have a huge diversity of viewpoints, politics and backgrounds," Cooke said. "You're going to have a group of well-minded citizens trying to do the right thing."

[college-girl199328]

1 woman's story of rape convinced all Weinstein trial jurors

Most of the jurors at Harvey Weinstein's Los Angeles trial were ready to convict him of crimes related to three of the four women he was charged with raping or sexually assaulting. Yet after weeks of deliberation, the eight men and four women voted unanimously to convict him of crimes against only one: a Russian-born model and actor known as Jane Doe 1. She lived in Rome and was visiting California for a film festival at age 34 in 2013 when she said the now-disgraced film mogul appeared uninvited at her Los Angeles hotel room door in the middle of the night.

The jurors were released from service and allowed to talk publicly after more than two months on Tuesday when they could not reach a unanimous decision on two aggravating factors that might have made for a higher sentence. Their deliberations took nine days, spanning more than two weeks, but those who spoke to reporters said the talks were never contentious. Weinstein was found guilty of one count of rape and two counts of sexual assault against Jane Doe 1. He now faces up to 18 years in prison in California to go with a 23-year sentence for a rape and sexual assault conviction in New York.

Jurors said that Jane Doe 1's composure and the fact that she did not contact Weinstein after he raped her allowed the divided group to reach consensus on her accusations. "I thought Jane Doe 1 was very convincing in her story," said one juror, a 62-year-old man who works in banking and only provided his first name, Michael, because he sought to maintain privacy amid the publicity surrounding the case.

The physical and technical evidence surrounding Jane Doe 1 was some of the thinnest at the trial, but jurors were told that under the law if they found an accuser's story credible, that alone could be enough to convict. They acquitted Weinstein on a count of sexual battery against a massage therapist. They were deadlocked, with 10 of the 12 voting for guilt on a count of sexual battery against model Lauren Young and voting 8-4 in favor of conviction on rape and sexual assault counts involving Jennifer Siebel Newsom, a documentary filmmaker, and wife of California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The Associated Press does not name people who have said they were sexually abused unless they come forward publicly or have given consent through their attorneys, as Young and Siebel Newsom have. Jane Doe 1 was the only one among them who had no further direct dealings with Weinstein or his representatives after the incident. She testified that she barely knew who he was, having been introduced only briefly at the film festival, and wanted nothing from him. Others, including Siebel Newsom, had friendly email exchanges with Weinstein or sought out future meetings after their incidents, a point the defense pounded in their cross-examinations and closing arguments.

That resonated with some jurors. Michael said he voted to convict on the Jane Doe 1 counts but reluctantly voted to acquit on the counts involving Siebel Newsom. The difference, he said, was the woman's "subsequent action."

"In a 2 1/2-year period, she had sent Mr. Weinstein over 35 emails," he said of Siebel Newsom. "She wanted access to Harvey Weinstein." It sounded like she wanted access to a lot of his resources. It raised a reasonable doubt in my mind. Weinstein has repeatedly denied engaging in any non-consensual sex. His lawyers called some of the encounters in the charges consensual and others flat-out fabricated, including the story told by Jane Doe 1. They pointed out that prosecutors had not even produced independent evidence to place Weinstein at her hotel.

"Jane Doe 1 is lying. Period," Weinstein's lawyer Alan Jackson said in his closing argument. One juror suggested that the broad statement was undermined by defense arguments that engaged with the details of Jane Doe 1's account.

"I think Jackson’s last comment, where Harvey just wasn’t there, hurt him," said the juror, Arnold Esqueda, who works as director of security for the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. "They were defending all these things, and then they just say he’s not there." They should have just said he wasn't there. He said he and other jurors made that point to a "very old school" man on the jury who "decided that he was going to vote guilty on that one." "On the rest, he remained largely innocent."

While tearful at times, Jane Doe 1's testimony was restrained and straightforward in comparison to some that followed. She spoke slowly with a Russian accent and made nearly no use of the translator on hand. Esqueda said the intensely emotional testimony of Siebel Newsom, who was screaming through tears at times during her testimony, might have been too much for some fellow jurors. The panel was divided 6-6 on the counts involving her when he suggested getting a read-back of her testimony from the court reporter.

"She had a little drama," Esqueda said. "So I suggested let’s re-read it, and I think after we read it, it switched a couple of people in her favor, without the drama." Changes over time in the massage therapist's story helped lead jurors to acquit on that count, Michael said.

Judge Lisa Lench tentatively scheduled Weinstein's sentencing for Jan. 9 after his attorneys asked that it be done promptly. But Lench said it might not happen so quickly given the issues surrounding the case, including the prosecutors' pending decision on whether or not to retry the deadlocked counts.

"We'll need to consult the victims first and foremost," Deputy District Attorney Paul Thompson said. He asked the judge if other Weinstein accusers, including some who testified against him at trial but were not part of the charges and the women whose counts were deadlocked, might give victim impact statements at the sentencing.

Lench promptly rejected the idea. "I’m not going to make this an open forum on all of the allegations that were presented in this trial," she said.

“So it'll just be Jane Doe 1, then," Thompson replied.