11 yr. old given 25 year jail sentence?
has...@forest.drew.edu
Did this actually happen? What makes me post this to a.f.u. is that it
there doesn't seem to be any evidence that it is true. I read on s.c.a.a.
that an 11 year old girl had been given 25 years in jail for killing a baby
left in her care. This supposedly took place in Austin, TX. The person who
posted the story claimed that the story had been on NPR. There is nothing on
NPR's website about it. There has been a thread on s.c.a.a. about it, but it
consists entirely of "How terrible/what a miscarriage of justice" but no one
seems to have any information on it.
Do we have any Texans reading this group and may have heard about it? I have
not seen *any* media coverage about this, including black oriented papers
such as the Amsterdam News or City Sun. What makes it sound ULish is the
claim that it was on NPR (just like Tommy Hilfiger/Ralph Lauren/Liz
Claiborne were on Oprah/60 minutes/20/20 and said they didn't want black
people wearing their clothes) In addition, it seems like this may be
a variation of a true story. I did manage to turn up an AP story about an
11 year old girl in Illinois, who was convicted of killing her half
brother, a baby. Perhaps it's a variation on this story?
Maggie Newman
In article <1v5yFsmQII2L@forest>, <has...@forest.drew.edu> wrote:
>Did this actually happen? What makes me post this to a.f.u. is that it
>there doesn't seem to be any evidence that it is true. I read on s.c.a.a.
>that an 11 year old girl had been given 25 years in jail for killing a baby
>left in her care.
For what it's worth, there's nothing about this on clari.news.blacks,
which ordinarily would cover a story that's of great concern to the
black community. Negative evidence, of course. On the face of it, the
story seems unlikely.
But it's interesting if seen as a reaction to the Nanny story. For
example, in Iowa, a woman recently gave birth to septuplets. My son
tells me that all the black-oriented (I believe the current euphemism is
"urban contemporary") talk radio stations in the Chicago area are
buzzing about the fact that a black woman in the Washington, D.C. area
gave birth to sextuplets and *didn't* get the free van, house, lifetime
supply of stuff, etc., that the Iowa woman received. This story could
be an exaggeration or twist that emerged out of the reduced sentence for
Louise Woodward. It's a short step from "if she'd been black they would
have thrown the book at her" to "this 11-year-old black girl was
sentenced to 25 years..."
Maggie "truth in sentences" Newman
David Martin
has...@forest.drew.edu wrote:
>
> Did this actually happen? What makes me post this to a.f.u. is that it
> there doesn't seem to be any evidence that it is true. I read on s.c.a.a.
> that an 11 year old girl had been given 25 years in jail for killing a baby
> posted the story claimed that the story had been on NPR. There is nothing on
> NPR's website about it. There has been a thread on s.c.a.a. about it, but it
> consists entirely of "How terrible/what a miscarriage of justice" but no one
> seems to have any information on it.
> Do we have any Texans reading this group and may have heard about it?
It sounds vaguely familiar. Searching the Houston Chronicle's site,
I came up with the following:
1:35 PM 11/10/1995
Teen sentenced to 14 years in child killings
SAN ANTONIO (AP) -- A young girl convicted of capital murder
for smothering two young children in her care was sentenced
today to a 14-year term.
Victoria Dalton, 13, wept when her punishment was announced
in State District Judge Carmen Kelsey's court.
It took jurors five days to decide the fate of Ms. Dalton,
who was convicted last week of suffocating 5-month-old Timothy
Gutierrez and his 2-year-old sister, Renee Gutierrez, as she
was watching them.
(snip)
Ms. Dalton was 12 at the time of the killings. Her family lived
with the family of the two babies, and she often was in charge of
caring for the younger children, said lawyers.
The home was a small two-bedroom apartment where up to 14 other
people lived at times.
The girl's defense attorneys contended Victoria lived in a
chaotic environment and that she would not be a threat to
society if she were placed on probation and in a stable home.
end quote.
I don't know if there is a more recent Austin case. If there is
I couldn't find it on the Chronicle server.
I did find a case of a twelve year old boy sentenced to 30 years
for beating someone to death with a tire iron, but that was Odessa.
David "it was an unsettling search" Martin
--
For the alt.folklore.urban FAQ see:
http://www.urbanlegends.com/afu.faq/ or
http://www.panix.com/~sean/afu/ or
E-mail mail-...@rtfm.mit.edu with "send
usenet/news.answers/folklore-faq/*" in the body of your message.
Robert Warinner
Maggie Newman (smne...@gsbkma.uchicago.edu) wrote:
: But it's interesting if seen as a reaction to the Nanny story. For
: example, in Iowa, a woman recently gave birth to septuplets. My son
: tells me that all the black-oriented (I believe the current euphemism is
: "urban contemporary") talk radio stations in the Chicago area are
: buzzing about the fact that a black woman in the Washington, D.C. area
: gave birth to sextuplets and *didn't* get the free van, house, lifetime
: supply of stuff, etc., that the Iowa woman received.
Parents of sextuplets got no special attention
But mother is happy for the McCaughey seven
November 22, 1997
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Few people stepped up to help Linden and Jacqueline
Thompson when she delivered six babies, the first black sextuplets
born in the United States.
But free baby food, car seats and diapers lavished on newborn
septuplets in Iowa prompted donations this week in Washington for the
Thompson babies, born last May -- one girl was stillborn, but the
surviving four girls and a boy, are healthy and learning to crawl.
"I was struggling here with my five babies and nobody really
acknowledged us," Jacqueline Thompson said Saturday. "I'm not bitter
about it. I'm so happy for the lady in Iowa and how the community
really came out to help her. Unfortunately that didn't happen for me."
While corporate America embraced Kenny and Bobbi McCaughey's
septuplets born Wednesday, corporations largely ignored letters
soliciting baby products for the Thompson children. The babies only
received some clothes and a few donations.
That began to change Friday after the media reported the discrepancy.
"Procter & Gamble called me yesterday," Mrs. Thompson said. "They
apologized for the mix-up. They're going to donate diapers."
A Washington child care center will provide free day care for the
Thompson children for five years, and a hotel owner has offered the
family -- or parents sans children, if they prefer -- a free vacation.
Still, that pales in comparison with the support given to the
McCaugheys of Carlisle, Iowa.
Copyright 1997 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
http://cnn.com/US/9711/22/sextuplets.ignored.ap/index.html
Other sextuplets do seem to have gotten a better deal, witness the
Haner sextuplets born last year:
Between June 1, when the family left St. Peter's in a donated,
16-passenger Ford van, and the sextuplets' first birthday next month,
the babies will have used 11,760 diapers and consumed 882 quarts of
pre-mixed formula, all donated.
Medicaid, supported by federal, state and local tax dollars, will have
expended more than $100,000 on nurses and aides in the Haner home,
with the goal of ensuring that this crucial first year goes as well as
it can.
http://www.timesunion.com/special/babygamble/1/haners.stm
Andrew "baby boom" Warinner
wari...@xnet.com
wari...@ttd.teradyne.com
http://www.xnet.com/~warinner
Home of the Flying Chickens: http://www.xnet.com/~warinner/chickens.html
Will Elliott
In article <EK67G...@midway.uchicago.edu>, smne...@gsbkma.uchicago.edu
(Maggie Newman) wrote:
> In article <1v5yFsmQII2L@forest>, <has...@forest.drew.edu> wrote:
> >Did this actually happen? What makes me post this to a.f.u. is that it
> >there doesn't seem to be any evidence that it is true. I read on s.c.a.a.
> >that an 11 year old girl had been given 25 years in jail for killing a baby
> >left in her care.
>
> For what it's worth, there's nothing about this on clari.news.blacks,
> which ordinarily would cover a story that's of great concern to the
> black community. Negative evidence, of course. On the face of it, the
> story seems unlikely.
>
> But it's interesting if seen as a reaction to the Nanny story. For
> example, in Iowa, a woman recently gave birth to septuplets. My son
> tells me that all the black-oriented (I believe the current euphemism is
> "urban contemporary") talk radio stations in the Chicago area are
> buzzing about the fact that a black woman in the Washington, D.C. area
> gave birth to sextuplets and *didn't* get the free van, house, lifetime
> supply of stuff, etc., that the Iowa woman received. This story could
> be an exaggeration or twist that emerged out of the reduced sentence for
> Louise Woodward. It's a short step from "if she'd been black they would
> have thrown the book at her" to "this 11-year-old black girl was
> sentenced to 25 years..."
>
> Maggie "truth in sentences" Newman
From Saturday's AP Wire:
==================================
D.C. Sextuplets Draw Few Donations
By DEB RIECHMANN
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Few people stepped up to help Linden and Jacqueline
Thompson when she delivered six babies, the first black sextuplets born in
the United States.
But free baby food, car seats and diapers lavished on newborn septuplets
in Iowa prompted donations this week in Washington for the Thompson
babies, born last May -- one girl was stillborn, but the surviving four
girls and a boy, are healthy and learning to crawl.
``I was struggling here with my five babies and nobody really
acknowledged us,'' Mrs. Thompson said Saturday. ``I'm not bitter about it.
I'm so happy for the lady in Iowa and how the community really came out to
help her. Unfortunately that didn't happen for me.''
While corporate America embraced Kenny and Bobbi McCaughey's septuplets
born Wednesday, corporations largely ignored letters soliciting baby
products for the Thompson children. The babies only received some clothes
and a few donations.
That began to change Friday after the media reported the discrepancy.
``Procter & Gamble called me yesterday,'' Mrs. Thompson said. ``They
apologized for the mix-up. They're going to donate diapers.''
A Washington child care center will provide free day care for the
Thompson children for five years, and a hotel owner has offered the family
-- or parents sans children, if they prefer -- a free vacation.
Still, that pales in comparison with the support given to the McCaugheys
of Carlisle, Iowa.
[snip]
==================================
Angus Johnston
dr...@furrfu.com (Drew Lawson) wrote:
>smne...@gsbkma.uchicago.edu (Maggie Newman) wrote:
>
> > But it's interesting if seen as a reaction to the Nanny story. For
> > example, in Iowa, a woman recently gave birth to septuplets. My son
> > tells me that all the black-oriented (I believe the current euphemism is
> > "urban contemporary") talk radio stations in the Chicago area are
> > buzzing about the fact that a black woman in the Washington, D.C. area
> > gave birth to sextuplets and *didn't* get the free van, house, lifetime
> > supply of stuff, etc., that the Iowa woman received.
>
> While I'm not denying that life is unfair, the focus of the media
> coverage that I keep hearing (evening news, CNN) is to them being
> the *only* surviving septuplets. The DC woman only had s[i]x babies,
> the slacker.
According to the news stories posted here, one of the DC kids was
stillborn, which means that mom only gets credit for quints. Back in the
days of Dionne that might have been good for some brouhaha, but not in the
age of fertility drugs in which we now live.
The adulation that the Iowa family is receiving is certainly
misplaced---there was a small piece in the Times a couple days ago in which
any number of fertility docs said that it sends a _really_ bad message.
Besides that, the impulse some Americans have to send goodies to famous
people in difficult straits boggles me. What's more, I have no trouble
believing that the woman in DC might have scored a smaller rake if she'd
been the one with seven. But as it stands, I don't see much of a race angle
in the fact that she's been ignored.
--
Angus Johnston
"What state grows the most vegetables?"
"California."
---The Answer Man
Drew Lawson
In article <EK67G...@midway.uchicago.edu>, smne...@gsbkma.uchicago.edu
(Maggie Newman) wrote:
> But it's interesting if seen as a reaction to the Nanny story. For
> example, in Iowa, a woman recently gave birth to septuplets. My son
> tells me that all the black-oriented (I believe the current euphemism is
> "urban contemporary") talk radio stations in the Chicago area are
> buzzing about the fact that a black woman in the Washington, D.C. area
> gave birth to sextuplets and *didn't* get the free van, house, lifetime
> supply of stuff, etc., that the Iowa woman received.
While I'm not denying that life is unfair, the focus of the media
coverage that I keep hearing (evening news, CNN) is to them being
the *only* surviving septuplets. The DC woman only had sex babies,
the slacker.
I haven't paid attention to who was giving all of the stuff to the
Iowa couple. Any of it that is from local businesses could be
attributed to a more generous community than DC has. At least by
reputation, urban settings can tend to be less cheritable than "farm
country."
I've never lived in farm country, so I can't compare the two.
Drew "thank god I'm a suburban boy" Lawson
--
Drew Lawson | I'd like to find your inner child
dr...@furrfu.com | and kick its little ass
http://www.furrfu.com/ |
H Gilmer
Drew Lawson (dr...@furrfu.com) wrote:
: In article <EK67G...@midway.uchicago.edu>, smne...@gsbkma.uchicago.edu
: (Maggie Newman) wrote:
: > buzzing about the fact that a black woman in the Washington, D.C. area
: > gave birth to sextuplets and *didn't* get the free van, house, lifetime
: > supply of stuff, etc., that the Iowa woman received.
: While I'm not denying that life is unfair, the focus of the media
: coverage that I keep hearing (evening news, CNN) is to them being
: the *only* surviving septuplets. The DC woman only had sex babies,
: the slacker.
: I haven't paid attention to who was giving all of the stuff to the
: Iowa couple. Any of it that is from local businesses could be
: attributed to a more generous community than DC has. At least by
: reputation, urban settings can tend to be less cheritable than "farm
: country."
The septuplets are getting donations from major corporations. So did
some white sextuplets. The black sextuplets only got a little bit of
stuff from their immediate community.
One of the big corporations (I can't remember which and now I can't
find the article), after being informed of this discrepancy, aplogized
for the "oversight" and starting forking over the goodies to the black
sextuplets . Other donations have been coming in as well, like offers
for childcare and suchlike.
Hg
Charles A. Lieberman
has...@forest.drew.edu wrote:
> I read on s.c.a.a.
> that an 11 year old girl had been given 25 years in jail for killing a baby
> left in her care.
> There has been a thread on s.c.a.a. about it, but it
> consists entirely of "How terrible/what a miscarriage of justice"
That a girl apparantly convicted of murder is put in jail for 25 years is a
miscarriage of justice? Or is it that it's *only* 25 years? (I'm not
giving my opinion, I don't have the facts either)
Charles A. Lieberman http://www.fortunecity.com/skyscraper/WhiteCat/25/index.html
Brooklyn, New York, USA
Lee Rudolph
ang...@mindspring.com (Angus Johnston) writes:
>any number of fertility docs said that it sends a _really_ bad message.
What, that taking drugs can sometimes cause women to commit unnatural acts?
Lee "old news" Rudolph
Mike Holmans
On 25 Nov 1997 06:00:11 GMT, bob...@gte.net (Bob Ward) wrote, after
quoting the whole of Maggie Newman's post:
>Where did the additional information/suggestion that it was a black
>girl come from? Sounds like someone is dealing the race card off the
>bottom of the deck, here.
>
Now we understand why Bob has to quote the whole thing. Maggie left in
the bit from the original post which referred to s.c.a.a,
soc.culture.african.american, but snipped some bits from the original
which would have made it blindingly clear to anyone with more than
seven functioning braincells that the subject was black.
As Bob is unable to spot which are the salient details in posts to
which he wishes to add his two Turkish lira's worth, he feels it
necessary to quote extensively in case we can work out what awakened
his curiosity and, hopefully, point out what he missed in his first
reading.
Mike "but I can't be bothered" Holmans
El Sig quotes extensively too. Mostly, it's great swathes of
"Airplane" -- which is a film with actors in it, but that's not
important right now
Mike Holmans
On 25 Nov 1997 11:09:54 GMT, "Vicki Parslow-Stafford"
<vl...@gil.com.au> wrote:
>Am I correct in thinking that the McCaugheys had had extensive media
>coverage prior to the birth, in relation to Mr & Mrs McCaughey's refusal
>to abort some of the foetuses in order to increase the chances of a
>healthy term pregnancy for the remaining foetuses?
>
>I may well be confusing the McCaughey's situation with another, but if
>not, I would guess that the Thompson family's relative lack of assistance
>might be due to not having a savvy PR/media representative -- something
>that possibly a disadvantaged black family might not seek, or be offered?
>
I think you are referring to the UKoGBaNIan case, that of Mandy
Allwood, who conceived octuplets. Doctors advised that the chances of
all eight being born healthy were negligible, and suggested that they
abort some of the foetuses to improve the chances of the rest.
Ambulance-chasing PR wiz Max Clifford was quickly on the case to
negotiate the deals with the tabloids.
She announced that she was going to carry all eight to term because it
was the right thing to do, and it was nothing to do with any newspaper
offering money for her story at piecework rates, ie, the more babies
born, the more moolah. She miscarried.
NOTE: Anyone under the misconception that a.f.u is a good forum in
which to discuss the rights and wrongs of selective abortion,
fertility treatments, or related matters is wrong. Please waste your
and other people's time somewhere else.
Mike "misconceived posts ya us" Holmans
Pergish1
dr...@furrfu.com (Drew Lawson), seeking that outer child, said on 25 Nov 1997
00:52:21 GMT:
> The DC woman only had sex babies,
>the slacker.
Hardly a slacker, in that case.
Margaret "Don't try this at home" Lillard
--------------------------
"Margaret knows a lot of words and she doesn't believe in letting any of them
go to waste." -- Dennis the Menace, Jan. 19, 1991
Visit The Domain of the Devil Dogs at http://members.aol.com/devdogz
jspinner
WooHoo! A law question! A chance to redeem myself from my slightly
embarassing Barbie post...
>has...@forest.drew.edu
>Did this actually happen? What makes me post this to a.f.u. is that it
>there doesn't seem to be any evidence that it is true. I read on
s.c.a.a.
>that an 11 year old girl had been given 25 years in jail for killing a
baby
>left in her care. This supposedly took place in Austin, TX. The person
who
>posted the story claimed that the story had been on NPR. There is
nothing
>on NPR's website about it. There has been a thread on s.c.a.a. about
it,
>but it consists entirely of "How terrible/what a miscarriage of
justice" but no
>one seems to have any information on it.
It is true.
The NPR story aired on All Things Considered on November 14th, 1997.
It's transcript number is 97111403-212
The case was also briefly mentioned in a Boston Herald article November
22, 1997 but an article in The Dallas Morning News discusses the race
and class issues a little better (November 21, 1997).
The girls name was Lacresha Murray. From the Dallas article:
"Ms. Murray is a 12-year-old African-American girl. Last year, she was
sentenced to 20 years in prison in the death of a 2-year-old girl. Like
Ms. Woodward, Ms. Murray was baby sitting.
She was helping her grandparents who ran an informal child-care
operation.
Austin prosecutors said Ms. Murray, 11 at the time, was andry over
having to care for the child, Jayla Belton. Prosecutors said she beat
Jayla, who died of a ruptured liver. As in the Woodward case, no one
actually saw the beating.
The verdict generated outrage from many African-Americans in Austin
primarily because Ms. Murray had a poorly funded public defender. A
judge granted a new trial. Ms. Murray got a better-funded defense. The
defense claimed Jayla alread was injured from prior abuse from within
her own home.
It didn't matter. Not only was the 12-year-old convicted again, she
received more time. She got 25 years."
The article goes off into opinion after that. It is noted in the
article that Jayla Belton was also black.
Jon "Lexis Beats Both Snot and Bricks" Spinner
Jon Spinner
Network Specialist
UMKC School of Law
jspi...@umkc.edu
(816) 235-2649
---------------------------------------------------------
love's the i guess most only verb that lives
(her tense beginning, and her mood unend)
from brightly which arise all adjectives
and all into whom darkly nouns descend
-- e e cummings
Jim Everman
Pergish1 wrote:
> Margaret "Don't try this at home" Lillard
Uh,, where else would you suggest we try it?
--
Jim Everman eve...@Anet-STL.com
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by
stupidity.
Drydusty
>>I read on s.c.a.a. that an 11 year old girl had been given 25 years in jail
for killing a >>baby left in her care. This supposedly took place in Austin, TX
to which David replied:
>I don't know if there is a more recent Austin case. If there is
>I couldn't find it on the Chronicle server.
There IS a big case in Austin revolving around this. Back in early 1996, an 11
year old black girl named "LaCretia Murray" was babysitting a small baby (also
black, if that is relevant), and she supposedly shook him or something, and he
died.
They had a huge trial in Austin around July-August 1996, and she was found
guilty, and sentenced to several years, I think. But, of course the local
black community had a big hemorrhoid attack and whined about how the "racist"
DA was overreacting in zealously prosecuting her (although if it had been a
white babysitter, they would have bitched if he DIDN'T zealously prosecute....)
So, they had ANOTHER trial, I think in either late '96 or early 1997, a whole
team of self-anointed Black defense attorneys took on her case pro-bono....
.....and she was convicted AGAIN.....and got a much more severe sentence than
she did the first go-round!!!!!!
I lived in Pflugerville at the time, and the local news carried it non-stop.
From what I recall, the girl's conduct in the courtroom contributed mightily to
the negative verdicts...she acted like a real retard. Personally, I didn't
much care about the trial one way or another.
It DOES illustrate one excellent attribute of the Texas justice system....more
than any other state, if someone commits a serious crime, they have an
excellent probability of getting nailed for it...without that BULLSHIT excuse
of "being a minor" standing in the way. Juvenile crime is one of the worst
problems in this nation, and mollycoddling the little shits, of WHATEVER race,
is no solution!!! (rant off)
in closing....wasn't it nice of me not to mention what a goofy name "LaCretia"
is? Back to the chicks named "Placenta" vector.....
"LaCretia......ExCretia....."
Jennifer Philhower
I checked the Austin American-Statesman archives:
"Girl arrested in toddler's death, child is youngest
murder suspect in recent memory in Travis County"
--05-31-96
(Travis County is where Austin is located)
"County seeks rare indictment on girl held in todder's
death"
-06-13-96
"Trial set for girl accused of killing toddler"
-06-19-96
"Judge rules girl, 12, must stay in custody, Murray is
awaiting a second trial after being convicted in toddler's
death"
-01-13-97
Articles are unavailble unless you have the sekrit password
and two-fifty, and I am lacking both. Seeing as it's the
Statesman publishing the articles, they may have proven no
more informative than the headers.
Jen "toddling off" Philhower
mitcho
Dry "This May Sound Racist" dusty wrote:
> to which David replied:
> >I don't know if there is a more recent Austin case. If there is
> >I couldn't find it on the Chronicle server.
> They had a huge trial in Austin around July-August 1996, and she was found
> guilty, and sentenced to several years, I think. But, of course the local
> black community had a big hemorrhoid attack and whined about how the "racist"
> DA was overreacting in zealously prosecuting her (although if it had been a
> white babysitter, they would have bitched if he DIDN'T zealously prosecute....)
>
> So, they had ANOTHER trial, I think in either late '96 or early 1997, a whole
> team of self-anointed Black defense attorneys took on her case pro-bono....
Thanks for your objective and even-handed commentary, but I suspect it
would have been more edifying if the rest of us had just looked up the
original cite.
> the negative verdicts...she acted like a real retard. Personally, I didn't
> much care about the trial one way or another.
Oh yes, that is evident from the tone of your post.
> It DOES illustrate one excellent attribute of the Texas justice system....more
> than any other state, if someone commits a serious crime, they have an
> excellent probability of getting nailed for it...without that BULLSHIT excuse
Hmm. Call me Left-Coast, but I seem to draw quite different conclusions
about Texas justice.
> of "being a minor" standing in the way. Juvenile crime is one of the worst
> problems in this nation, and mollycoddling the little shits, of WHATEVER race,
> is no solution!!! (rant off)
You're right of course. I too have had enough of these junior
criminals. Nothing better than a little jail time to turn them into
proper bona-fide, card-carrying grown-up criminals.
Nonetheless, I still think you're a hopeless wanker. <PLONK>
Mitcho
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitcho of Goat Hill Rat Central mit...@netcom.com
Goat Hill, California http://www.employees.org/~ozyman
Charles Wm. Dimmick
mitcho wrote:
>
> Dry "This May Sound Racist" dusty wrote:
> > It DOES illustrate one excellent attribute of the Texas justice
> > system....more than any other state, if someone commits a serious
> > crime, they have an excellent probability of getting nailed for
> > it...without that BULLSHIT excuse
>
> Hmm. Call me Left-Coast, but I seem to draw quite different
> conclusions about Texas justice.
My personal observations on Texas justice, circa 1967:
1. One of my students was arrested for marijuana possession.
He was convicted and his sentence was 50 years (for possession,
NOT for selling).
2. I did a survey of an 11-county area of deep east Texas,
interviewing sheriffs, court clerks, etc., for the purpose
of compiling statistics on crimes, arrests, and convictions.
Over a 5-year period (1962-1967, I think), there were several
dozen murders in that 11-county area. They caught and
convicted all but one of the murderers. The average sentence
was 10 years, SUSPENDED.
Relevant facts: in all but two of the murders, the victim was
related to the murderer, either by blood or by marriage, or
by impending marriage. The unsolved murder was of a pig farmer,
found dead near the sty. They do NOT think that the pigs did it.
Irrelevant fact: I found little or no evidence of racial bias
for the more serious crimes. Petty crimes were another matter,
but not what I was studying.
Charles Wm. "tell me about Texas justice" Dimmick
ron
Vicki Parslow-Stafford wrote:
>
> The same syndicated media releases re the McCaughey's septuplets and the
> Thompson sextuplets featured in the Australian media this week. (Multiple
> births have been a big deal here ever since the Broderick nontuplets back
> in 1971).
>
> Am I correct in thinking that the McCaugheys had had extensive media
> coverage prior to the birth, in relation to Mr & Mrs McCaughey's refusal
> to abort some of the foetuses in order to increase the chances of a
> healthy term pregnancy for the remaining foetuses?
>
> I may well be confusing the McCaughey's situation with another, but if
> not, I would guess that the Thompson family's relative lack of assistance
> might be due to not having a savvy PR/media representative -- something
> that possibly a disadvantaged black family might not seek, or be offered?
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Vicki Parslow Stafford | "Oh, many a Cup of this
> Ipswich, Qld, Australia | forbidden Wine must drown
> Email vl...@gil.com.au | the memory of that
> Ph/fax +61 7 3281 5010 | insolence!"
>
> Robert Warinner <wari...@typhoon.xnet.com> wrote in article
> <65d1rt$360$2...@flood.xnet.com>...
> > Maggie Newman (smne...@gsbkma.uchicago.edu) wrote:
> > : My son
> > : tells me that all the black-oriented (I believe the current euphemism
> is
> > : "urban contemporary") talk radio stations in the Chicago area are
> area
> > : gave birth to sextuplets and *didn't* get the free van, house,
> lifetime
> > : supply of stuff, etc., that the Iowa woman received.
> >
> >
> > But mother is happy for the McCaughey seven
> >
>
> > Other sextuplets do seem to have gotten a better deal, witness the
> > Haner sextuplets born last year:
Why should anyone expect anything for free? Having a baby, or six
happens
on a regular basis. People are always looking for a freebee
Edward Rice
> Did this actually happen? What makes me post this to a.f.u. is that it
> there doesn't seem to be any evidence that it is true. I read on
s.c.a.a.
> that an 11 year old girl had been given 25 years in jail for killing a
baby
> left in her care. This supposedly took place in Austin, TX. The person
who
> posted the story claimed that the story had been on NPR. There is
nothing on
> NPR's website about it. There has been a thread on s.c.a.a. about it,
but it
> consists entirely of "How terrible/what a miscarriage of justice" but no
one
> seems to have any information on it.
> Do we have any Texans reading this group and may have heard about it? I
have
> not seen *any* media coverage about this, including black oriented
papers
> such as the Amsterdam News or City Sun. What makes it sound ULish is the
> claim that it was on NPR (just like Tommy Hilfiger/Ralph Lauren/Liz
> Claiborne were on Oprah/60 minutes/20/20 and said they didn't want black
> people wearing their clothes) In addition, it seems like this may be
> a variation of a true story. I did manage to turn up an AP story about
an
> 11 year old girl in Illinois, who was convicted of killing her half
> brother, a baby. Perhaps it's a variation on this story?
Write to the news division at NPR and ASK them, for pete's sake. That
won't confirm the story, but it will confirm whether they carried such a
story. They have a web site which probably even has the correct e-mail
address.
wal...@dnvn.com
In article <wmelliott-241...@news.fibr.net>,
wmel...@express-news.net (Will Elliott) wrote:
A white family with quintuplets [which is what sextuplets with one
stillborn amount to] just lost their house because they couldn't make
the payments. This idea that having a bunch of kids entitles one
to be 'acknowledged' and get a lot of free stuff is perverse.
If friends and neighbors want to help out -- fine -- but there is
no particular achievement or virtue in excess fertility and no reason
why mothers of multiples should be 'honored' or showered with material
possessions.
There have been many stories since the septuplets were born alive about
the fact that multiples with fewer babies are passe and rarely evoke much
interest -- to make this racist is silly.
k
kmef...@nospam.kih.net
>In article <1v5yFsmQII2L@forest>, <has...@forest.drew.edu> wrote:
>>Did this actually happen? What makes me post this to a.f.u. is that it
>>there doesn't seem to be any evidence that it is true. I read on s.c.a.a.
>>that an 11 year old girl had been given 25 years in jail for killing a baby
>>left in her care.
>
>For what it's worth, there's nothing about this on clari.news.blacks,
>which ordinarily would cover a story that's of great concern to the
>black community. Negative evidence, of course. On the face of it, the
>story seems unlikely.
>
>But it's interesting if seen as a reaction to the Nanny story. For
>example, in Iowa, a woman recently gave birth to septuplets. My son
>tells me that all the black-oriented (I believe the current euphemism is
>"urban contemporary") talk radio stations in the Chicago area are
>buzzing about the fact that a black woman in the Washington, D.C. area
>gave birth to sextuplets and *didn't* get the free van, house, lifetime
>supply of stuff, etc., that the Iowa woman received. This story could
>be an exaggeration or twist that emerged out of the reduced sentence for
>Louise Woodward. It's a short step from "if she'd been black they would
>have thrown the book at her" to "this 11-year-old black girl was
>sentenced to 25 years..."
>
>Maggie "truth in sentences" Newman
I agree with you that the "11 year old sentenced to 25 years"
story is probably false. Seeing as how this has never happened
before, the press would be all over it for weeks, if not months.
Concerning the septuplets vs. sextuplets, that dovetails quite
nicely with the same idea.
I've heard the same stuff bantered about on talk radio and
have the following thoughts:
1: Several women in the past two or three decades have given
birth to sextuplets and this story, while locally exciting, may not
hold enough water (no pun intended) for more than a one time 30 second
blurb on the evening national news. No woman, on the other hand, has
ever successfully given birth to seven live babies. Just as the first
time for anything, this is a national news item.
2: Mrs. Sextuplets lived in D.C., a large urban area. Her
next door neighbors and possibly her entire block were aware,
concerned and attempting to be helpful. Mrs. Septuplets lived in
"mumblymum", Iowa (some small 'burb outside of Des Moines) and, small
towns being as they are, the entire town set out to "take care of
their own".
3: Mr. Septuplets works for a Chevrolet dealer (hence the
van), the citizenry got together to buy the house (I only heard this
from one source so it may be questionable) and P&G heard the story
night after night and donated the Pampers. I'm certain Mrs.
Sextuplets got many gifts locally and, after being made aware of her
feat, P&G made the same "lifetime Pampers" gift to her.
Just some observations.
Kevin "multicolor in a monochrome society" Mefford
Eric Hocking
Mike Holmans wrote:
> On 25 Nov 1997 11:09:54 GMT, "Vicki Parslow-Stafford"
> <vl...@gil.com.au> wrote:
>
> >Am I correct in thinking that the McCaugheys had had extensive media
> >coverage prior to the birth, in relation to Mr & Mrs McCaughey's refusal
> >to abort some of the foetuses in order to increase the chances of a
> >healthy term pregnancy for the remaining foetuses?
> >
> >I may well be confusing the McCaughey's situation with another, but if
> >not, I would guess that the Thompson family's relative lack of assistance
> >might be due to not having a savvy PR/media representative -- something
> >that possibly a disadvantaged black family might not seek, or be offered?
> >
>
> I think you are referring to the UKoGBaNIan case, that of Mandy
> Allwood, who conceived octuplets. Doctors advised that the chances of
> all eight being born healthy were negligible, and suggested that they
> abort some of the foetuses to improve the chances of the rest.
I'll back Vicki on this one. She relates the Australian newspapers' reports
correctly and has the right set of 'n'tuplets. Read it yesterdays daily in
Melbourne, also was in televised media statements by the parents. Reported
that the McCaugheys refused abortion on health and moral grounds.
This was also grouped with reports that the Thompson family got nowhere near
the publicity or offers until someone pointed out the discrepancy. Still,
the
offers to the Thompson family (according to the newspapers) where nowhere
near
what the McCaugheys were offered. 9-seater wagon, house being built, 8
years
supply of apple juice and puree, nappies, childcare (diapers) etc to name a
few as against - the Thompsons offers of some car-seats, 2nd-hand clothing
and their local community raised $1500.
> Ambulance-chasing PR wiz Max Clifford was quickly on the case to
> negotiate the deals with the tabloids.
I remember the Allwood octuplets reporting and was disgusted by the
treatment
by the UKoGBaNIan and Oz tabloids. The Allwoods *were* reported as wanting
to
take the octuplets to full term as they'd made a deal with a tabloid of some
sort.
> She announced that she was going to carry all eight to term because it
> was the right thing to do, and it was nothing to do with any newspaper
> offering money for her story at piecework rates, ie, the more babies
> born, the more moolah. She miscarried.
>
> NOTE: Anyone under the misconception that a.f.u is a good forum in
> which to discuss the rights and wrongs of selective abortion,
> fertility treatments, or related matters is wrong. Please waste your
> and other people's time somewhere else.
>
> Mike "misconceived posts ya us" Holmans
--
Eric Hocking "A closed mouth gathers no feet."
Remove "nospam." from address to email.
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ehocking/
Drydusty
>My personal observations on Texas justice, circa 1967:
>Over a 5-year period (1962-1967, I think), there were several
>dozen murders in that 11-county area. They caught and
>convicted all but one of the murderers. The average sentence
>was 10 years, SUSPENDED.
I would be interested in more data about the nature of the crimes.....but
another facet of "Texas justice" I appreciate, is if a "murder" occurs...and is
"justified" by what I would consider relevant criteria (e.g., some guy rapes
another person's sister; someone is committing arson or property crimes), then
often the punishment meted out is reconciled with the "real harm" done by the
murderer.
Put another way...if the bastard deserved to die, then screw 'em.
Timothy A. McDaniel
In article <19971126043...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
Drydusty <dryd...@aol.com> wrote:
>if a "murder" occurs...and is
>"justified" by what I would consider relevant criteria (e.g., some guy rapes
>
>Put another way...if the bastard deserved to die, then screw 'em.
Sounds more like you think "if the bastard screwed 'em, then he
deserved to die" ...
Tim McDaniel, one of those prissy limp-wrists who believes in laws,
trials, due process, and all that liberal (*shudder*) stuff
--
Reply to tm...@crl.com
tm...@tmcd.austin.tx.us is not a valid address.
Sean Willard
Drydusty <dryd...@aol.com> wrote:
> in closing....wasn't it nice of me not to mention what a goofy name "LaCretia"
> is? Back to the chicks named "Placenta" vector.....
"If I were your wife I'd put poison in your coffee." - Lucrezia Borgia
"Ha ha! What a goofy name! 'Lucrezia'! <urg> <gasp> <choke> <die>"
- Drydusty
Gordon Butler
On 26 Nov 1997, Drydusty wrote:
>
> I would be interested in more data about the nature of the crimes.....but
> another facet of "Texas justice" I appreciate, is if a "murder" occurs...and is
> "justified" by what I would consider relevant criteria (e.g., some guy rapes
> another person's sister; someone is committing arson or property crimes), then
> often the punishment meted out is reconciled with the "real harm" done by the
> murderer.
>
> Put another way...if the bastard deserved to die, then screw 'em.
>
>
So how does this work? If the guy rapes my sister, am I supposed to rape
him? Is the same thing true for arson and burglary? Or is killing the
perpetrator justified under all these circumstances, so that if someone
steals my car, I can off him, because "the bastard deserved to die"?
I hear that Texas also has the highest rate of capital punishment in the
US. Does this mean that the crime rate is even higher, considering that
the government is now obliged to kill all these murderers, arsonists, car
thieves, jaywalkers, etc. were able to elude those individuals who were
justifiably pissed off at them?
_ Gord "on my best behavior' Butler
Vicki Parslow-Stafford
Thanks, Mike, I probably was thinking of Mandy Allwood. However, the
McCaughey name was already familiar when the birth was announced.
Hopefully Eric might turn up evidence of any previous Australian media
reports on the McCaugheys.
Nevetheless, it remains tough cheddar for the Thompsons.
John Band
Drydusty wrote in message <19971125190...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
<snip>
>It DOES illustrate one excellent attribute of the Texas justice
system....more
>than any other state, if someone commits a serious crime, they have an
>excellent probability of getting nailed for it...without that BULLSHIT
excuse
>of "being a minor" standing in the way. Juvenile crime is one of the worst
>problems in this nation, and mollycoddling the little shits, of WHATEVER
race,
>is no solution!!! (rant off)
>
>in closing....wasn't it nice of me not to mention what a goofy name
"LaCretia"
>is? Back to the chicks named "Placenta" vector.....
>
Why does the word "troll" spring to mind?
JB
Andrew Welsh
"John Band" <john...@merton.ox.ac.uk.fuckoffspammers> wrote:
: Why does the word "troll" spring to mind?
It's from AOL, hence it can't be a troll.
andrew "never overestimate the IQ of the average AOL user" Welsh
--
Andrew Welsh (and...@panix.com/ http://www.panix.com/~andreww)
Opinions expressed above are not necessarily endorsed by my employers.
As years went by, the Krays gained a sort of strange kudos as "Gentlemen thugs
and system integrators" - ew...@kirk.demon.co.uk
Gord Butler
On 25 Nov 1997, Drydusty wrote:
> There IS a big case in Austin revolving around this. Back in early 1996, an 11
> year old black girl named "LaCretia Murray" was babysitting a small baby (also
> black, if that is relevant), and she supposedly shook him or something, and he
> died.
>
> They had a huge trial in Austin around July-August 1996, and she was found
> guilty, and sentenced to several years, I think. But, of course the local
> black community had a big hemorrhoid attack and whined about how the "racist"
> DA was overreacting in zealously prosecuting her (although if it had been a
> white babysitter, they would have bitched if he DIDN'T zealously prosecute....)
>
> So, they had ANOTHER trial, I think in either late '96 or early 1997, a whole
> team of self-anointed Black defense attorneys took on her case pro-bono....
>
> .....and she was convicted AGAIN.....and got a much more severe sentence than
> she did the first go-round!!!!!!
>
> I lived in Pflugerville at the time, and the local news carried it non-stop.
> From what I recall, the girl's conduct in the courtroom contributed mightily to
> the negative verdicts...she acted like a real retard. Personally, I didn't
> much care about the trial one way or another.
>
> It DOES illustrate one excellent attribute of the Texas justice system....more
> than any other state, if someone commits a serious crime, they have an
> excellent probability of getting nailed for it...without that BULLSHIT excuse
> of "being a minor" standing in the way. Juvenile crime is one of the worst
> problems in this nation, and mollycoddling the little shits, of WHATEVER race,
> is no solution!!! (rant off)
>
You think that an 11 year old should be as legally accountable as an
adult? If that's the case, why not let them sign contracts, vote, drive
cars and other the other things we restrict to adults? Hell, why not put
them in uniform, just as Hitler did in the closing days of World War II?
(Although I don't think they were as young as 11.)
You don't do a very good job of disguising your racism. Crime has become
another code word for "nigger", just as "bussing" was a few years ago. I
note that while you say race doesn't matter, you identify the race of both
the babysitter and the victim, and go on about the local black community's
response, as if that had anything to do with the thread.
I'm not sure what you mean by your crude reference to the defendant as a
"retard". If you mean that she was mentally delayed, or that the
eleven-year-old didn't act like a "mature adult" in court, then I guess
she got what she deserved, right? If it was the former however, I'm
surprised you are not more empathetic, considering the intellectual level
of your own comments.
Before you mouth off any further about what a serious problem juvenile
crime is, I suggest that you check out some of the data. In North
America, the murder rate, which is about the only reliable indicator of
violent crime, has been steadily diminishing since the late 1960's. I
notice that serious reports on crime rates are usually buried deep in the
back pages of newspapers, while the latest murder is always on the front
page, so look beyond the front page headlines.
Gord "still mollycoddling children" Butler
Alice Faber
In <01bcf94f$4033cb00$3e4901cb@default> "Vicki Parslow-Stafford" <vl...@gil.com.au> writes:
>Thanks, Mike, I probably was thinking of Mandy Allwood. However, the
>McCaughey name was already familiar when the birth was announced.
>Hopefully Eric might turn up evidence of any previous Australian media
>reports on the McCaugheys.
I don't recall having heard news reports about the impending septuplets
prior to their birth. However, the McCaugheys share a last name and its
spelling with the Lieutenant Governor of the State of New York, Betsy
McCaughey (Ross), a woman who has managed to make noise with, I believe,
such accusations as the Governor has the State Police spying on her. The
Governor, mind you, chose this woman as his running mate...
Alice "New York, New York" Faber
john konopak
>
> On 26 Nov 1997, Drydusty wrote:
>
> >
> > I would be interested in more data about the nature of the crimes.....but
> > another facet of "Texas justice" I appreciate, is if a "murder" occurs...and is
> > "justified" by what I would consider relevant criteria (e.g., some guy rapes
> > another person's sister; someone is committing arson or property crimes), then
> > often the punishment meted out is reconciled with the "real harm" done by the
> > murderer.
> >
> > Put another way...if the bastard deserved to die, then screw 'em.
> >
> So how does this work? If the guy rapes my sister, am I supposed to rape
> him? Is the same thing true for arson and burglary? Or is killing the
> perpetrator justified under all these circumstances, so that if someone
> steals my car, I can off him, because "the bastard deserved to die"?
Sorry Gord...You're confusing Texas with Looosyanna--not at all a
difficult thing to do out along the Sabine River. In "the gret Stet",
you can off anybody who gets into your car uninvited, and prolly get
away with wounding anyone who gets close enough to set off the car
alarm.
John"Walkin' softly"Konopak
john konopak
kmef...@nospam.kih.net wrote:
(snipped)
>
> 1: Several women in the past two or three decades have given
> birth to sextuplets and this story, while locally exciting, may not
> hold enough water (no pun intended) for more than a one time 30 second
> blurb on the evening national news. No woman, on the other hand, has
> ever successfully given birth to seven live babies. Just as the first
> time for anything, this is a national news item.
Call me picky, but "given birth" doesn't quite seem accurate here to
describe the situation. P'raps "had extracted" would be more like it?
Btw, is it true that her doctors stitched up her vagina to prevent the
foetuses from being unexpectedly expelled? The more I learn about
childbirth, the gladder I am I can't!
John"Sew what!?"Konopak
>
> 2: Mrs. Sextuplets lived in D.C., a large urban area. Her
> next door neighbors and possibly her entire block were aware,
> concerned and attempting to be helpful. Mrs. Septuplets lived in
> "mumblymum", Iowa (some small 'burb outside of Des Moines) and, small
> towns being as they are, the entire town set out to "take care of
> their own".
>
> 3: Mr. Septuplets works for a Chevrolet dealer (hence the
> van), the citizenry got together to buy the house (I only heard this
> from one source so it may be questionable) and P&G heard the story
> night after night and donated the Pampers. I'm certain Mrs.
> Sextuplets got many gifts locally and, after being made aware of her
> feat, P&G made the same "lifetime Pampers" gift to her.
>
> Just some observations.
>
> Kevin "multicolor in a monochrome society" Mefford
--
?_
Debs Gaunt
> I agree with you that the "11 year old sentenced to 25 years"
>story is probably false. Seeing as how this has never happened
>before, the press would be all over it for weeks, if not months.
The following reproduced from Quaker-P mailing list digest , who usually do
their homework thoroughly before they vector...
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 07:41:16 -0800
From: "Jean C. Jones" <jcj...@PENNSNET.ORG>
Subject: child prisoner
A 12-year old Black girl (11 at the time of the trial) was sentenced to a
25 year prison term in Texas for the death of a baby (or child) in her care.
Unlike the au pair case apparently there was no publicity about it. I
heard about it on NPR. Through NPR I learned that the girl's name is
Lacreesha Murray. The trial may have been in Austin Texas. She is in a
prison 300 miles from Austin. She can receive cards and letters, but no
gifts. Don't have the address.
Have just left a message at an organization that is working on the
case--marches, etc. Their message says she was wrongfully accused. That
telephone number is 512-707-3743. I'll pass along any info that I get.
Regards,
Debbie "Quaking" Gaunt
Drydusty
I said, in fine prose:
>> Put another way...if the bastard deserved to die, then screw 'em.
to which Gordo replied:
>So how does this work? If the guy rapes my sister, am I supposed to rape
>him?
well, if you were into that kind of shit, it might be a component of the
vengeance....but most persons would be satisfied with executing the offender.
The Supreme Court really screwed up big-time about 25 years ago when it
disallowed execution of those guilty of forcible rape.
>Is the same thing true for arson and burglary?
If someone burns down another person's home....I wouldn't really have much
problem with executing him. Burglary? Probably not execution, unless harm was
done to an occupant at the time.
>Or is killing the perpetrator justified under all these circumstances, so that
if someone
>steals my car, I can off him, because "the bastard deserved to die"?
Let's put it this way: some asshole who stole a car battery from me in 1981
just got sentenced to 18 years for some meth related shit. My first comment
was, "that'll serve the bastard right for ripping me off in '81 !!"
Vengeance sometimes comes slow, but sooner or later, it comes.
Drydusty
>I hear that Texas also has the highest rate of capital punishment in the
>US. Does this mean that the crime rate is even higher, considering that
>the government is now obliged to kill all these murderers, arsonists, car
>thieves, jaywalkers, etc. were able to elude those individuals who were
>justifiably pissed off at them?
Eh, there are some areas of Texas where frontier justice does a fair job of
keeping the local scum in line (BTW, mostly white trash in those instances).
The rest of the main problems in San Antone, Houston, and Dallas are
reflections of sad demographic realities, and the system is trying to keep up.
TX has spent a ton of money over the past decade building prisons at a frantic
rate....woulda been better to broaden the executions, so wouldn't need so much
space. Murderers, rapists, and three-time loser violent felons are useless to
society, and should never hit the streets again, so might as well let the
(insert deity here) get a hold of 'em now.....
Will...@hotmail.com
In article <347C54...@ou.edu>,
jkon...@immerspamlos.ou.edu wrote:
>
> >
> > On 26 Nov 1997, Drydusty wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I would be interested in more data about the nature of the crimes.....but
> > > another facet of "Texas justice" I appreciate, is if a "murder" occurs...and is
> > > "justified" by what I would consider relevant criteria (e.g., some guy rapes
> > > another person's sister; someone is committing arson or property crimes), then
> > > often the punishment meted out is reconciled with the "real harm" done by the
> > > murderer.
> > >
> > >
>
> > perpetrator justified under all these circumstances, so that if someone
> > steals my car, I can off him, because "the bastard deserved to die"?
>
> difficult thing to do out along the Sabine River. In "the gret Stet",
> you can off anybody who gets into your car uninvited, and prolly get
> away with wounding anyone who gets close enough to set off the car
> alarm.
>
> John"Walkin' softly"Konopak
Hey Johnny.....how bout going to Loosyanna your self and test your
theory? Sounds like a good idea!
Will
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Henry Churchyard
In article <1v5yFsmQII2L@forest>, <has...@forest.drew.edu> wrote:
> Did this actually happen? I read on s.c.a.a. that an 11 year old
> girl had been given 25 years in jail for killing a baby left in her
> care. This supposedly took place in Austin, TX. Do we have any
> Texans reading this group and may have heard about it? I did manage
> to turn up an AP story about an 11 year old girl in Illinois, who
> was convicted of killing her half brother, a baby. Perhaps it's a
> variation on this story?
Search for "Lacresha Murray" (*not* "LaCretia"), or "Jayla Belton" --
just did a quick Altavista search and turned up several hits,
including
http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/metropolitan/97/02/18/child-s-sentence.html
--
Henry Churchyard || "...equal to 2800 pounds, 19 shillings, and elevenpence
three farthings, as nearly as can be expressed in English money, the Aphanian
currency being a complex decimal coinage which would take too long to explain"
- Tom Hood, _Petsetilla's Posy_ (1870) http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~churchh/
Drydusty
Gordo noted:
> You think that an 11 year old should be as legally accountable as an
> adult?
In a criminal context, yup. I don't care how young, or how sane, someone is,
if they are able to put the voluntary motor actions together to commit a
heinous crime, they should be held accountable. I *might* be a bit uneasy
about executing a 6 year old...but if he committed a heinous crime, I probably
wouldn't lose much sleep over his execution.
>If that's the case, why not let them sign contracts, vote, drive
> cars and other the other things we restrict to adults?
Simple distinction between points of "civil privilege," as it were, and being
held responsible for CRIMINAL acts.
> You don't do a very good job of disguising your racism. Crime has become
> another code word for "nigger", just as "bussing" was a few years ago.
Gordo, are you insinuating that there is a strong correlative link betwixt
black americans and criminal behavior? Isn't that a racist statement?
Sheesh, next you'll be telling me that 95% of all assaults and murders of NY
City cabbies are perpetrated by blacks...or that 75% of the black male
population of Baltimore ages 16-40 is either behind bars, on parole, or on
probation. Obviously, urban UL's of the first order.
> note that while you say race doesn't matter, you identify the race of both
> the babysitter and the victim, and go on about the local black community's
> response, as if that had anything to do with the thread.
It has EVERYTHING to do with the context of the whole situation. I was in
Austin during the entire second trial, and it was primarily the Black community
ranting and raving about the race of both the accused and the victim.....in
fact, a small group of blacks noted that perhaps it was a bit hypocritical to
essentially "diminish" the life of a black infant...because if it was a black
babysitter and a WHITE infant....well.....
> I'm not sure what you mean by your crude reference to the defendant as a
> "retard". If you mean that she was mentally delayed, or that the
> eleven-year-old didn't act like a "mature adult" in court, then I guess
> she got what she deserved, right?
I meant she acted like an idiot or moron during the proceedings....hopping
around like it was a church social or something. Contrast that to Louise
Woodward's demeanor.
> If it was the former however, I'm surprised you are not more empathetic,
considering the intellectual level
> of your own comments.
Actually, Gordo, I have an undergrad degree in sociology, plus more than a few
classes in criminology and deviant psych....plus a law degree to boot. I
probably have more of a working knowledge of this subject that you do (assuming
you have ANY).
> Before you mouth off any further about what a serious problem juvenile
> crime is, I suggest that you check out some of the data.
Uh, you mean the recent data noting the overall increase in
crime....accompanied by an INCREASE in juvenile crime, particularly in urban
areas....particularly amongst minority youth?
>In North America, the murder rate, which is about the only reliable indicator
of
> violent crime, has been steadily diminishing since the late 1960's.
"Murder ...about the only reliable indicator?" According to what questionable
data? From what ivory tower academician? Plus, that sentence's entire premise
(violent crime diminishing since the 1960's) is ripe for dispute.
> notice that serious reports on crime rates are usually buried deep in the
> back pages of newspapers, while the latest murder is always on the front
> page, so look beyond the front page headlines.
Crime statistics, like AIDS statistics concerning true prevalence of the
disease relative to gays and straights, are usually spun like crazy in order
not to tweak certain interest groups. Recall the crime conference they were
going to have at Johns Hopkins a few years back, to examine possible genetic
links to criminal propensity? The NAACP and Urban League went berserk, saying
that inevitably the data would reflect very badly on African-Americans.
> Gord "still mollycoddling children" Butler
Children are ok. Criminal offenders who are children? Nail 'em.
H Gilmer
john konopak (jkon...@ou.edu) wrote:
: > blurb on the evening national news. No woman, on the other hand, has
: > ever successfully given birth to seven live babies. Just as the first
: > time for anything, this is a national news item.
: Call me picky, but "given birth" doesn't quite seem accurate here to
: describe the situation. P'raps "had extracted" would be more like it?
I take it Caesarian births are sort of a new concept for you?
: Btw, is it true that her doctors stitched up her vagina to prevent the
: foetuses from being unexpectedly expelled? The more I learn about
Considering that they've been rather cagey with the media, I rather
doubt that they've officially announced this particular "fact".
I'll leave the medical arguments to people who can say it better than
I can.
Hg
Eric Hocking
Vicki Parslow-Stafford wrote:
> Thanks, Mike, I probably was thinking of Mandy Allwood. However, the
> McCaughey name was already familiar when the birth was announced.
> Hopefully Eric might turn up evidence of any previous Australian media
> reports on the McCaugheys.
Nope, nothing previous to the birth.
> Nevetheless, it remains tough cheddar for the Thompsons.
My sympathies an' all - but we're talking about chemically aided multiples
here aren't we?I've done no research on this but recall that multiples are
common with IVF due to the (un)success rate of fertilisation.
So these guys *planned* multiples, expecting a high and early mortality
rate.
Christ, in a modern society we're planning for conception by attrition.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Vicki Parslow Stafford | "Oh, many a Cup of this
> Ipswich, Qld, Australia | forbidden Wine must drown
> Email vl...@gil.com.au | the memory of that
> Ph/fax +61 7 3281 5010 | insolence!"
--
Eric "doing my bit for ZPG" Hocking
(Hell, who'd sleep with me anyway)
Paul.Atlan
>Drydusty gargled
><snip>
>>It DOES illustrate one excellent attribute of the Texas justice
>>...without that BULLSHIT
<snip>
>> little shits, of WHATEVER race,
>>wasn't it nice of me not to mention what a goofy name "LaCretia" is?
In a word: "No"
And then John Band wondered:
> Why does the word "troll" spring to mind?
>
> JB
I think it's the capitals, myself.
Paul 'But then again, it might be the "I'm not racist" bit, or the
repetitious use of s**t' A.
Bob Hiebert
Gord Butler <gbut...@thezone.net> wrote:
A few good jabs at drydusty, but closed with the following:
>Before you mouth off any further about what a serious problem juvenile
>crime is, I suggest that you check out some of the data. In North
>America, the murder rate, which is about the only reliable indicator of
>violent crime, has been steadily diminishing since the late 1960's. I
>notice that serious reports on crime rates are usually buried deep in the
>back pages of newspapers, while the latest murder is always on the front
>page, so look beyond the front page headlines.
While I agree with your sentiment, I disagree with your assessment on crime
in general, and youth crime specifically. Looking through a number of
searchs revealed some interesting insights. Some of them to your points, and
some more relevant to this very off-topic thread that I promise not to post
to any more.
I was unable to track down crime stats from the late 60's. Looking at the
FBI's crime statistics (www.fbi.org), violent crimes (murder, forcible rape,
robbery, aggravated assualt)per 100,000 people climed from 468 in 1976, to
557 in 1985, to 685 in 1995. The good news was that this was down from its
high of 758/100,000 in 1991. Unfortunately, while the rate of violent crime
declined 6% from 1990 to 1995, the percent of total arrests that were
Juvenile arrests went up from 16% to 19% (Source: FBI as reported in Time
Magazine).
I found many many reports and articles that said that treating youths as
criminals was worse than inneffective. Increased recidivism and more
violent repeat crimes were just some of the problems.
There is a lot of people with the opinion that the "bubble" of kids that
will be getting older in the next few years could cause an even larger
explosion of violent crime. A 1996 report stated that he number of boys
ages 14 to 17 will rise by 500,000 - to about 8 million - by the year 2000,
and there will be a 23 percent increase in this population by 2005.
-------------------
Excerpts from Time Magazine -- 7/21/97 -- pp 26+ -- Sally Donnelly
In truth, the problem isn't quite as pressing as it was a few years ago.
With crime rates dropping, so is juvenile crime. But felonies by kids had
exploded over the previous 10 years, a legacy of the crack trade and armed
gangs, so the recent decline is still a dip in a high plateau. From 1985 to
1995, juvenile arrests for violent crimes rose 67%. Perhaps a fifth of
all violent crimes is the work of teens.
Over the past five years, however, every state except Hawaii has decided to
allow some kids to be tried in adult criminal courts. Altogether, some
12,300 youths are prosecuted as adults each year in state courts. That is
about 9% of all juveniles arrested for violent crimes and a 70% increase
over the number who were tried as adults a decade ago.
------------------
I don't think 11 year olds should get a 25 year sentance. I don't
believe in racial causality to the crime rate. That doesn't mean that youth
crime is not a problem.
Further dialog is invited....but not via AFU.
Bob Hiebert
----------------------------------------------
For the alt.folklore.urban archive:
http://www.urbanlegends.com
Vicki Parslow-Stafford
Eric Hocking <ehoc...@nospam.ozemail.com.au> wrote in article
<347CE99A...@nospam.ozemail.com.au>...
> Eric "doing my bit for ZPG" Hocking
> (Hell, who'd sleep with me anyway)
Eric me lad, me and my computer will go into snooze mode with you any
time.
Vicki ("go to sleep, go to sleep, when you he-ar the beep") PS
Paul.Atlan
Drydusty wrote:
>
> I said, in fine prose:
>
trolling)
Damn. My Official AFU Handbook and Civil Code is missing a page: Can
someone remind me what the penalty for unwarranted self congratulation
is in these parts?
Paul "Somebody hold me, please, or I'll rip this guy's head off" A.
Mike Woloch
Drydusty wrote:
>
> Gordo noted:
> >In North America, the murder rate, which is about the only reliable indicator
> of
> > violent crime, has been steadily diminishing since the late 1960's.
> Several real-crime TV-shows have vectored that the murder rate has not changed
significantly since the 1960's, however, the number of violent assaults, such as
attempted murder, have increased.
This is, at their explanation, due to improved medical technology. While thirty
years ago a shooting, stabbing, or beating would kill you, there is now a good
chance that you won't die from the injuries because of more prompt and more modern
emergency medical techniques.
-Mike Woloch
mwo...@nf.acres.com - trying to cut down on my junk e-mail despite the lack of
real junk mail at the moment (postal strike in Canada, you know)
James Linn
Eric Hocking <ehoc...@nospam.ozemail.com.au> wrote in article
<347CE99A...@nospam.ozemail.com.au>...
> Vicki Parslow-Stafford wrote:
>
> > Thanks, Mike, I probably was thinking of Mandy Allwood. However, the
> > McCaughey name was already familiar when the birth was announced.
> > Hopefully Eric might turn up evidence of any previous Australian media
> > reports on the McCaugheys.
>
> Nope, nothing previous to the birth.
>
> > Nevetheless, it remains tough cheddar for the Thompsons.
>
> My sympathies an' all - but we're talking about chemically aided
multiples
> here aren't we?I've done no research on this but recall that multiples
are
> common with IVF due to the (un)success rate of fertilisation.
>
> So these guys *planned* multiples, expecting a high and early mortality
> rate.
> Christ, in a modern society we're planning for conception by attrition.
Happened to watch the press conference(on CNN) held by the fertility doctor
used by the McCaugheys.
She held the conference to address some of the unfounded criticisms by
people critical of
the clinic without knowing the facts.
The McCaugheys' firstborn was also the result of a treatment, the same one
as produced the septuplets.
Only difference is the second treatment used LESS of the agent than the
first. So it isn't as cut and dried
as some may have postulated.
She also explained that while the rate of multiple births is roughly twice
that of "natural" conceptions, multiple births
happen less than 5% of the time under their methodology, with the vast
majority of them being twins. The rate for multiples
higher than triplets was still less than .5%. I'm recalling these figures
from memory - -if anyone has a transcript, please
confirm.
This may become a larger issue as time goes by, as I have seen other
reports showing that at least in the North American
group studied, that average male sperm motility is falling, hence an
increased need for interventions in the future.
James "just had my third, done my bit" Linn
My opinions are MINE,MINE,MINE!!!
Gord Butler
On 26 Nov 1997, Drydusty wrote:
> Let's put it this way: some asshole who stole a car battery from me in 1981
> just got sentenced to 18 years for some meth related shit. My first comment
> was, "that'll serve the bastard right for ripping me off in '81 !!"
>
> Vengeance sometimes comes slow, but sooner or later, it comes.
>
I really don't know if you are merely trolling or you are serious about
what you say in this and the subsequent post. If you are serious, then it
is obvious you don't (or can't> distinguish between between vengeance and
justice.
It might be of interest to note that offenders don't make this distinction
either, because problems with abstract reasoning are one of their most
common cognitive deficits. Since I am no longer a Halfway House Director,
and you aren't my client anyway, I'll not waste any more time in futile
discussion.
_ Gord "Fuck it. I'm going for a beer." Butler
Gord Butler
On Thu, 27 Nov 1997, Mike Woloch wrote:
> Drydusty wrote:
> >
> > Gordo noted:
>
> > >In North America, the murder rate, which is about the only reliable indicator
> > of
> > > violent crime, has been steadily diminishing since the late 1960's.
> > Several real-crime TV-shows have vectored that the murder rate has not changed
> significantly since the 1960's, however, the number of violent assaults, such as
> attempted murder, have increased.
>
> This is, at their explanation, due to improved medical technology. While thirty
> years ago a shooting, stabbing, or beating would kill you, there is now a good
> chance that you won't die from the injuries because of more prompt and more modern
> emergency medical techniques.
>
Might have some influence, but I'm more inclined to go with another
explanation put forward by criminologists: The apparent increase in
violent assaults is due to an increased level of reporting. There is
generally less tolerance by victims, particularly in the area of domestic
violence, which had been grossly under-reported. Also, baby
boomer demographics plays a role, in that a 40 year old is more likely to
formally report an assault than would an 18 year old. For these kinds of
reasons, criminologists are more likely to consider the murder rate as the
most reliable indicator.
_ Gord "getting way off the thread here" Butler
Gord Butler
On Thu, 27 Nov 1997, Paul.Atlan wrote:
> Drydusty wrote:
> >
> > I said, in fine prose:
> >
> <snip snip snip> <woof> (incineration of potentially infectious
> trolling)
>
> Damn. My Official AFU Handbook and Civil Code is missing a page: Can
> someone remind me what the penalty for unwarranted self congratulation
> is in these parts?
>
Death, if Drydusty gains power.
_ Gord Butler
Eric Hocking
Vicki Parslow-Stafford wrote:
> Eric Hocking <ehoc...@nospam.ozemail.com.au> wrote in article
> <347CE99A...@nospam.ozemail.com.au>...
>
> > Eric "doing my bit for ZPG" Hocking
> > (Hell, who'd sleep with me anyway)
>
> Eric me lad, me and my computer will go into snooze mode with you any
> time.
Ho, Ho! You realise mine is a laptop young lady?!
This just about spun my hard-drive off it's spindle.
> Vicki ("go to sleep, go to sleep, when you he-ar the beep") PS
--
Eric Hocking "A closed mouth gathers no feet."
D.M. Procida
<wal...@dnvn.com> wrote:
> If friends and neighbors want to help out -- fine -- but there is
> no particular achievement or virtue in excess fertility and no reason
> why mothers of multiples should be 'honored' or showered with material
> possessions.
Depends what sort of society you want to live in. If you think that
child-bearing and child-rearing are valuable occupations, and you
recognise that they are also difficult and expensive ones and that
mothers deserve all the help and support that is available from society
and the state, then you might consider this differently. Of course, just
because a woman has had an exciting number of babies does not mean she
ought to receive preferential treatment from the pharmaceutical
companies and their ilk who are exploiting her as another advertising
opportunity; she should, though, like all mothers, receive support in
proportion with her need from the state and from civic society, its
institutions and members.
Or maybe you think that such notions amount to a disgraceful and
unwarranted interference on the part of the state into the private lives
of its citizens, and an unfair burden upon those other members of
society who have no personal interest in the parents or their children.
There used to be an idea called "socialism". You never had it in the
USA. We used to have it here in Europe, but not any more really, except
maybe in Bologna.
D.M. Procida
--
"...the so-called support act, The Awkward Moments, climbed onstage
unsmilingly, not even looking at the audience. They only played one
song: "Autobahn". In German. For twenty minutes. Then they swaggered
off, not once having acknowledged the crowd. Conceited arrogant swine."
D.M. Procida
Debs Gaunt <debs...@aol.com> wrote:
> A 12-year old Black girl (11 at the time of the trial) was sentenced to a
> 25 year prison term in Texas for the death of a baby (or child) in her
> care. She is in a prison 300 miles from Austin.
She is in a *prison*? She's a 12-year-old girl, and she's in *prison*? I
presume that the Austin, Texas referred to above is not the one in the
USA (you know, the big country with the president who looks a bit like
Michael Schumacher the racing driver); it must be some other Texas where
the rule of law and the ideals of justice are despised, and compassion,
decency and understanding mean nothing. A *prison*?
I simply do not believe she's in a prison. Perhaps youth penal
establishments are called 'prisons' in the US?
Daniele Procida
mitcho
Just a side note:
D.M. Procida wrote:
>
> Depends what sort of society you want to live in. If you think that
> child-bearing and child-rearing are valuable occupations,
I, for one, do not. There is no shortage of human beings on this
planet, and every new human being in the rich countries like the US or
Europe will use something like ten times [1] the resources and produce
ten times the waste and pollution as a new human being born in the
undeveloped world. It is socially irresponsible to go out of one's way
to attempt to produce more human beings. Producing seven new human
beings in a single whack is socially criminal.
But mine is, of course, a minority view.
>and you
> recognise that they are also difficult and expensive ones and that
> mothers deserve all the help and support that is available from society
Hmm. Given that extreme multiple births like this only arise out of
fertility therapies, and that these fertility regimes are very, very
expensive, I would submit that such parents are not exactly destitute
and can prolly get by on their own. But a handout is, after all, a
handout. And who, especially among the well-off, can resist a handout?
Mitcho
[1] No cites; it's something like this. You get my drift.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitcho of Goat Hill Rat Central mit...@netcom.com
Goat Hill, California http://www.employees.org/~ozyman
Joe Boswell
In article <199711280...@dialup240.dip.cf.ac.uk>, "D.M. Procida"
<pro...@cf.ac.uk> writes
>There used to be an idea called "socialism". You never had it in the
>USA.
This is most unfair. For example, find out about the 'wobblies',
officially the International Workers of the World, and leading
characters of that organisation such as Joe Hill. He also wrote some
magnificent socialist songs. It is fairly successful right-wing
propaganda that the idea of socialism is 'foreign' to the USA. The idea
has turned up often enough there, but this contradicts right wing
prejudices.
--
Joe Boswell * If I cannot be free, I'll be cheap.
James Linn
mitcho <mit...@netcom.com> wrote in article <347EE5...@netcom.com>...
> Just a side note:
>
> D.M. Procida wrote:
> >
> > Depends what sort of society you want to live in. If you think that
> > child-bearing and child-rearing are valuable occupations,
>
I very much value those occupations. My family (my wife and I) choose to
have my wife fullfill that role, even though it meant a diminshed income. I
do believe
its lead to a better quality of life, but everyone has their own measures
of such things.
> I, for one, do not. There is no shortage of human beings on this
> planet, and every new human being in the rich countries like the US or
> Europe will use something like ten times [1] the resources and produce
> ten times the waste and pollution as a new human being born in the
> undeveloped world. It is socially irresponsible to go out of one's way
> to attempt to produce more human beings. Producing seven new human
> beings in a single whack is socially criminal.
>
Its not like she planned for 7. Even with fertility drugs, the odds are
astronomical.
While I applaud your recognition of the limited resources of the planet,
you don't seem to
respect the choice the McCoughey's made. I am pro-choice, but personally
wouldn't in
most circumstances revert to abortion (circumstances do vary and the
McCaucghey's was extreme).
But I respect the choice they made, even if I might have chosen the to go
with the odds, and lower the
number of births to ensure the viability of a smaller number.
Instead of sitting back and decrying population increases, why don't you do
something about our lack
of resources on a personal level. Make a committment to a social action
group or something. There is
no lack in this world of complainers.
> But mine is, of course, a minority view.
>
> >and you
> > recognise that they are also difficult and expensive ones and that
> > mothers deserve all the help and support that is available from society
>
> Hmm. Given that extreme multiple births like this only arise out of
> fertility therapies, and that these fertility regimes are very, very
> expensive, I would submit that such parents are not exactly destitute
> and can prolly get by on their own. But a handout is, after all, a
> handout. And who, especially among the well-off, can resist a handout?
A bad assumption.
Based on the house (a 2 bedroom cottage really) and the husband's job as a
clerk at a
car dealership (the wife is/was stay at home), I wouldn't be making any
assumptions of wealth on their
part. They probably sacrificied alot to afford those treatments. They were
trying to have their second child,
after having their first the same way.
Will they need the gifts? Absolutely, if they want anywhere near the same
standard of living as they had before, or even provide
for the essentials for their family.
The wife will be unable to do even part time work for many years, and the
husband will also spend alot of time
just doing household tasks. So doing overtime or studying at night for a
degree or any of the "raise yourself up by
the bootstraps" activities will be beyond them for a while.
I think what alot of cynical people are missing here is that many of the
greatest gifts (House, Van etc.) were from the small town where they live.
It would be a different situation in a big city.
Mitcho, you might try walking a mile in someone else's shoes before
reverting to the cynical snide critic.
James Linn
My opinions are MINE,MINE,MINE!!!
Joe Boswell
In article <0jNPALAT...@bigbad.demon.co.uk>, Joe Boswell
<j...@bigbad.demon.co.uk> writes
>For example, find out about the 'wobblies',
>officially the International Workers of the World
I misplet 'Industrial'. I will now go outside and drink beer as a
penance.
John Varela
"Prior to the 1930s, the American trade union movement was also in its
majority anti-statist. The American Federation of Labor (AFL) was
syndicalist, believed in more union, not more state power, and was
anti-socialist. Its predominant leader for many years, Samuel Gompers, once
said when asked about his politics, that he guessed he was three quarters of
an anarchist. And he was right. Europeans and others who perceived the
Gompers-led AFL as a conservative organization because it opposed the
socialists were wrong. The AFL was an extremely militant organization, which
engaged in violence and had a high strike rate. It was not conservative, but
was rather a militant anti-statist group. The United States also had a
revolutionary trade union movement, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW).
The IWW, like the AFL, was not socialist. It was explicitly anarchist, or
rather, anarcho-syndicalist. The revived American radical movement of the
1960s, the so-called New Left, was also not socialist. While not doctrinally
anarchist, it was much closer to anarchism and the IWW in its ideology and
organizational structure than to the Socialists or Communists."
Seymour Martin Lipset, _American Exceptionalism, A Double-Edged Sword_
Norton, 1996 ISBN 0-393-03725-8
page 37
John Varela
(delete . between world and net to e-mail me)
Maggie Newman
Joe Boswell <j...@Xbigbad.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <199711280...@dialup240.dip.cf.ac.uk>, "D.M. Procida"
><pro...@cf.ac.uk> writes
>>There used to be an idea called "socialism". You never had it in the
>>USA.
>
>This is most unfair. For example, find out about the 'wobblies',
I'm pretty sure Daniele has heard of the Wobblies, Joe. Trouble is,
there's such a big gap between singing "I Dreamed I Saw Joe Hill Last
Night" and reminiscing about a 1924 general strike in San Francisco and
actually *having* (for whatever length of time) socialised medicine, and
public ownership of the media and certain industrial means of
production, etc.
Maggie "we never *had* it" Newman
Joe Boswell
In article <65n8hn$2...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>, John Varela
<j...@os2.bbs.com> writes
[IWW not socialists, contrary to my assertion]
>
You are right, I was wrong.
Scroggle9
Dear Debs: you said, quite obnoxiously--
>Read the f****** post properly. I copied and pasted an article from the
>Quaker B mailing list for your information.
Since you are obviously so fucking brilliant, you might try to post your web
page address properly; you omitted the "www." before "geocities.com" thus your
URL is inaccurate. It should read "http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4714/"
You also note:
>What the barabarians on the otherside of the pond do with their young has
nothing to >do with me except as a distant spectator.
After determining the correct URL for your home page in spite of your arror, I
see that you are from England.
Tell you what Debs: next time the fucking Germans get a hard-on and decide to
stomp the shit out of your little tea-sipping, rotting teeth, sissy country,
then I vote that us "barbarians on the other side of the pond" just stay home
and let 'em have their way.
Buckingham Palace would make a pretty good Kraut sausage factory anyhow, way I
figure it.
P.S., your heir apparant is a squirrel of the highest order. What kind of
dipshit would dump a hot babe to chase after that horse-faced dog, Camilla?
Ha, your future king's life ambition is to be a tampon for Lady Camilla! Ha!
Debs Gaunt
Scroggle9 kindly remarked:
>Since you are obviously so fucking brilliant, you might try to post your web
>page address properly; you omitted the "www." before "geocities.com" thus
>your
>URL is inaccurate. It should read
>"http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4714/"
Thanks for letting me know - I appreciate the trouble you took (a) to check it
out and (b) to let me know.
Oh, And I agree totally about Charles. He's not that popular here, either.
Regards,
Debbie "Are all americans this aggressive?" Gaunt
Bob Hiebert
scro...@aol.com (Scroggle9) wrote:
>P.S., your heir apparant is a squirrel of the highest order. What kind of
>dipshit would dump a hot babe to chase after that horse-faced dog, Camilla?
Just going out on a limb here, but could the answer be, "A man in love?"
Bob "only possible reason" Hiebert
mit...@netcom.com
James Linn wrote:
:
:> I, for one, do not. There is no shortage of human beings on this
:> planet, and every new human being in the rich countries like the US or
:> Europe will use something like ten times [1] the resources and produce
:> ten times the waste and pollution as a new human being born in the
:> undeveloped world. It is socially irresponsible to go out of one's way
:> to attempt to produce more human beings. Producing seven new human
:> beings in a single whack is socially criminal.
:
:Its not like she planned for 7. Even with fertility drugs, the odds are
:astronomical.
I certainly don't expect you or very many other people to agree with my
points made above, but given my stated position, and the fact that the
couple already had a healthy child, it was, IMHO, hugely irresponsible to
undergo more fertility treatments to have still more children.
:Instead of sitting back and decrying population increases, why don't you
do :something about our lack of resources on a personal level. Make a
:committment to a social action group or something.
Oh, I do a lot of little things. But I have recognized that choosing
never to reproduce is the biggest favor I can do for this planet (and
stop yer sniggering, not for *those* reasons). No matter what I do to
minimize my impact on the planet, it would all be cancelled out many
times over by the activities of any children I might have, especially if
(when) those children reproduced, etc.
And BTW, who's complaining? Certainly not I. I was putting forward an
alternative viewpoint.
:Based on the house (a 2 bedroom cottage really) and the husband's job as
a :clerk at a car dealership (the wife is/was stay at home), I wouldn't
be :making any assumptions of wealth on their part. They probably
sacrificied :alot to afford those treatments. They were trying to have
their second :child, after having their first the same way.
I suggested they were hardly destitute, and I stand by that. But by now,
seven newborns later, I'm sure I will have to revise my assessment. So it
was irresponsible of them in even more ways than I originally suggested.
Their first child might have had a college education, for example, but now
how many of the eight will the familiy be able to put through college?
And why would these folks and their problems be more worthy of my concern
than the Mexican families five blocks from Goat Hill Rat Central who
built their families the old-fashioned way, bless 'em; and in fact,
because of the teachings of their religion, had little choice as to how
many kids they had?
I'm just taking the wider view.
:The wife will be unable to do even part time work for many years, and
the :husband will also spend alot of time just doing household tasks. So
doing :overtime or studying at night for a degree or any of the "raise
yourself up :by the bootstraps" activities will be beyond them for a
while.
You're right. But this sort of thing happens to all sorts of folks,
through accident or other misadventure. I refuse to work up much concern
for otherwise well-off people who visit this sort of thing on themselves
because they are under the impression there just aren't enough human
beings in the world.
:Mitcho, you might try walking a mile in someone else's shoes before
:reverting to the cynical snide critic.
Is it cynical simply to observe that procreation is the single most
selfish act in which humans can engage? Personally, I am a believer in
the virtues of enlightened self-interest, so I won't begrudge folks their
selfish diversions, if they don't hurt anyone else. Indeed, I indulge
myself with some regularity. But I refuse to pretend there is something
noble about reproducing, or that people who do so deserve my admiration
and support for their own sake.
As for walking a mile in someone else's shoes, walking a mile in your own
shoes, instead of driving, is one of the cool things you can do to save
the planet. I do this a lot. And considering the nature of the
establishments from which I often find myself walking, I've probably
saved a few lives into the bargain.
Mitcho
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Ed Kaulakis
mit...@netcom.com wrote:
...
> Oh, I do a lot of little things. But I have recognized that choosing
> never to reproduce is the biggest favor I can do for this planet (and
> stop yer sniggering, not for *those* reasons). No matter what I do to
> minimize my impact on the planet, it would all be cancelled out many
> times over by the activities of any children I might have, especially
> if (when) those children reproduced, etc.
I gotta say Mitcho, the DNA copy-count a few years down the road is the
way we've kept the score for four billion years, and I don't see it
changing any time soon. Brains constructed not to replicate themselves
will remain rare, no?
The DNAnet will interpret your non-transmissivity as damage, and will
route around you.
The current fashion of hating one's own gene pool because of its success
simply baffles me. Would it be a moral act to go back in time and
prevent the first global ecocide, as executed by the blue-green algae?
If so, why? If not, why not?
Ed "_likes_ oxygenated air" Kaulakis"
Gord Butler
On 27 Nov 1997, Drydusty wrote:
>
>
> Actually, Gordo, I have an undergrad degree in sociology, plus more than a few
> classes in criminology and deviant psych....plus a law degree to boot. I
> probably have more of a working knowledge of this subject that you do (assuming
> you have ANY).
>
All right, I'll indulge in a pissing contest, for the moment. I have an
undergraduate degree in Sociology, with subsequent studies in Criminology,
Management, etc., and seventeen years working for the John Howard Society,
a community based correctional agency. For ten years, I was Director of a
halfway house, and I am presently working with a computer based
educational program in prisons and halfway houses. I suppose that
qualifies as working knowledge.
>
> "Murder ...about the only reliable indicator?" According to what questionable
> data? From what ivory tower academician? Plus, that sentence's entire premise
> (violent crime diminishing since the 1960's) is ripe for dispute.
>
I'll respond to this for the benefit of others who might have a genuine
interest in the subject.
There is really nothing extraordinary about the reasons why the murder
rate is generally considered the most, if not the only reliable indicator.
Based on an organic model, any level of violence in society will
precipitate a ratio of that violence's ultimate expression, i.e. murder.
Murder is therefore the byproduct of general social violence that allows
us to gauge changes in the overall level.
When dead bodies turn up, the police and courts deal with the event in a
generally consistent manner over both jurisdictions and time. Lesser
offences, such as assault, are subject to changes in legislation, police
reporting procedures, social attitudes, and host of other variables. An
example would be domestic violence, which now has a higher rate of both
reporting and conviction.
In Canada, the high point for murder was 1969, and the rate has been in
overall decline since that time. Like many other things, this was driven
by baby boomer demographics, in that there was a very high proportion of
young males in the population. Those same hot-blooded young males, as a
statistical group, were no doubt beating up their girlfriends and spouses
as well, but the rate of reporting and conviction would have been much
lower than today.
Police Departments defending their budgets, the media, unscrupulous
politicians and even community groups are usually eager to point to any
statistics, no matter how questionable, that indicate an increase in
crime. That is not to say that all such data is useless, but it needs to
be viewed with skepticism, and in a larger context.
I have always felt rather sorry for criminologists. It's a job where they
are constantly obliged to tell people what they don't want to hear, and
then be accused of being ivory tower academics because they "don't really
know what's going on." No wonder they don't become politicians, or even
sell a lot of books.
Anyway, to hell with it. I don't expect a constructive dialogue from
anyone who believes in capital punishment for children, and I don't need
the aggravation.
_ Gord "I'm outta here" Butler
danny burstein
given all the discussion about this topic, I figured I'd violate some
copyright restrictions and post this news article one of my far-flung
correspondents sent me.
Alas, I don't recognize the newspaper, but the article seems legit.
Sunday Times by Spectator, 11/24/97
'Black Louise' case ignites justice row
by Christopher Goodwin Los Angeles
AFTER a baby she had helped to look after died, the young girl was
arrested, charged with murder, tried in a blaze of publicity, convicted
and sentenced to 25 years in prison. The case dominated the media for
weeks, sparking furious protests from the convicted girl's supporters
and provoking intense debate about childcare in America.
But this was not Louise Woodward, the 19-year-old British au pair
freed from jail two weeks ago - thanks to an expensive defence, a
barrage of international protests and a sympathetic judge. Lacresha
Murray, a poor black girl from the wrong side of the tracks in
Austin, Texas, was only 11 when she is said to have committed the
crime for which she is now serving 25 years. Everyone who knew her
said she was incapable of the crime. No physical evidence was
presented and there were no witnesses.
The contrast between the two cases has reignited debate about
justice in America. "If this had been a white, blue-eyed girl,
or the daughter of a millionaire black family," said Sterling
Lands, a local pastor, "Lacresha would not have been convicted."
In the wake of the Woodward case, Lacresha's lawyers will be filing
an appeal next month.
Lacresha lived in a poor neighbourhood with her grandparents and
seven other children they had adopted, including three of her
siblings. Her grandparents also offered unlicensed childcare to
poor black families.
On May 24, 1996, Lacresha's grandmother was out of town and
her grandfather was heavily medicated because of his polio.
Nevertheless, there were 12 children in the house, including
Lacresha, her siblings and the children brought in for childcare -
the youngest of them five months old.
Jayla Belton, 2, had been dropped off in the morning by her
stepfather, a cook. According to Lacresha, her siblings, her
grandfather and a neighbourhood witness, Jayla appeared to have
been ill from the moment she arrived; she was sweating profusely,
vomiting and holding her side. In the late afternoon, after she
saw Jayla was "breathing funny", Lacresha took the child to her
grandfather. The toddler was taken to hospital and pronounced
dead shortly afterwards.
An autopsy found Jayla had been killed "by a massive blunt
injury to the abdomen with ruptured liver". She also had four
broken ribs and bruising.
All the children were taken out of the home and placed with
child protection services. Five days after Jayla's death
Lacresha was interviewed by police, who said she had agreed to
talk to them and that she waived her right to a lawyer. Although
at first she strenuously denied that she had harmed the child,
after 2 1/2 hours of intense questioning she said she had
accidentally dropped and kicked her.
The following day Lacresha was charged with capital murder.
Prosecutors claimed she stamped on the baby because she was
upset at having to take care of her.
As soon as the charges were announced, Lacresha's name and
photograph were printed in the local paper - most unusual in
cases involving minors. Ronnie Earle, the Travis County
district attorney, also gave many interviews in which he
claimed: "This case shows that Austin is not immune from
this hideous malady sweeping the country of children killing
children."
Earle, who was facing a tough battle for re-election a
couple of months later - the first time he had had to face an
opponent since becoming district attorney in 1976 - rushed the
case to trial in early August 1996.
"I don't know what happened to this girl between the time that
she was born and the age of 11," he said, "but we believe she
committed a horrible crime. We can't have kids killing kids."
Lacresha's inexperienced public defender, who was not allowed
the resources to pay for an expert medical witness, offered no
defence - believing that since Lacresha's apparent confession
was the only evidence the jury would not convict. He was wrong.
The jury found her guilty of intentional injury to a child and
criminally negligent homicide. She was sentenced to 20 years.
Parisrice Robinson, vice-president of the local chapter of the
National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People,
said: "I find it incredible that she would be interrogated
and held accountable for what she did without a lawyer present."
The judge was so concerned that Lacresha had not had a fair
trial that he ordered a retrial, which took place in February
this year. This time Lacresha had more lawyers, some expert
witnesses and personal testimonials. The outcome, however, was
virtually the same: the predominantly white jury found Lacresha,
then 12, guilty of injury to a child. The sentence was not
quite the same: she got 25 years.
"The depictions of Woodward drew out our sympathies because
they were about innocence and weakness and vulnerability,"
said Larry Bethune, a white minister in Austin. "Lacresha
Murray was portrayed as poor and ignorant."
Local prosecutors remain unmoved. "I'm glad I don't live
in Massachusetts," said Stephanie Emmons, an assistant
district attorney. "There, a baby killer got off."
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
mitcho
Ed Kaulakis wrote:
> The current fashion of hating one's own gene pool because of its success
> simply baffles me.
M3 T00. I certainly don't hate humanity. But it doesn't hurt to
recognize the substantial imact, much of it negative, people have on the
environment and on other people. And it's nice if you can act on that
recognition by minimizing your personal impact (to the extent that a
citizen of the rich world can).
Pretending people have no negative impact on the environment is, given
the evidence all around us, pretty witless. Amzingly, _Forbes_ magazine
(to use one example), a publication I otherwise treasure, seems to take
this very position.
> Would it be a moral act to go back in time and
> prevent the first global ecocide, as executed by the blue-green algae?
> If so, why? If not, why not?
These Darwinist approaches to the discussion are so tiresome. No one is
talking about the extinction of the human race. We are talking about a
reality in which there are several billion people on a planet the
supporting capacaity of which is unknown. Some of those people, as it
happens the people who have the most impact, can choose not to
reproduce. Most of the people on the planet in practical fact have no
such choice. I am exercising my choice in a way I think is good for me
and others, and I am advocating that others do the same.
I think it should be pretty clear that even if my seductive reasoning
converted everyone reading this post, and all decided to have no
children, the human race would go zipping along nicely. If I converted
everyone in the nation of France, for example, there would still be no
danger of humanity dying out.
And as for the success of my own personal genes, I'm sure the world will
get on just fine without them. There will be plenty of sturdy Arabs,
Indians and Chinese taking the place of the ancestors I won't have.
Mitcho
Lee Rudolph
mitcho <mit...@netcom.com> writes:
>And as for the success of my own personal genes, I'm sure the world will
>get on just fine without them. There will be plenty of sturdy Arabs,
>Indians and Chinese taking the place of the ancestors I won't have.
What, the Mormons stole them while you weren't looking?
Lee "this genome deliberately left blank" Rudolph
has...@forest.drew.edu
No, she is not in prison. Nor was she given a 25 year sentence. 25 years
is the *maximum* the girl can spend under the state's supervision; the way
this case has been talked about implies that the 25 years is mandatory. That
means juvenile dentention and/or jail. At the present time she is in
Texas' version of juvenile detention. If she has not been paroled by the
time she is an adult (I'm not sure how Texas defines this)she will go to
jail.
Angus Johnston
smne...@gsbkma.uchicago.edu (Maggie Newman) wrote:
> Joe Boswell <j...@Xbigbad.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > "D.M. Procida" <pro...@cf.ac.uk> writes
> >>There used to be an idea called "socialism". You never had it in the
> >>USA.
> >
> >This is most unfair. For example, find out about the 'wobblies',
>
> ...there's... a big gap between singing "I Dreamed I Saw Joe Hill Last
> Night" and reminiscing about a 1924 general strike in San Francisco and
> actually *having* (for whatever length of time) socialised medicine, and
> public ownership of the media and certain industrial means of
> production, etc.
>
> Maggie "we never *had* it" Newman
We may never have had socialism (though I'd argue we've had, and have, bits
and pieces of it), but in Joe's defense I'd note that Daniele's comment,
quoted above, has a bit of a fuzzy antecedent problem---it could easily be
read as saying that the USA never "had" the _idea_ of socialism.
And though John---and Seymour---are certainly right to note that the IWW
wasn't (isn't, as it turns out) much of a socialist outfit, the idea
certainly flowered in a variety of other contexts in the good old US of A.
Still does, after a fashion.
--
Angus Johnston
D.M. Procida
The ill-mannered and intemperate Debs Gaunt spluttered:
> Read the f****** post properly. I copied and pasted an article from the
> Quaker B mailing list for your information. What the barabarians on the
> other side of the pond do with their young has nothing to do with me
> except as a distant spectator.
>
> Debbie "Fed up with semi-literates" Gaunt
Well, Debbie, would you explain to us precisely what your complaint was?
Did you fear perhaps that I might have been holding *you* responsible
for the Texan penal system?
By the way, someone who chooses to call herself "Debs" really ought not
to bring the question of barbarism into conversations. And someone who
writes about "barabarians" really ought not to mention literacy.
As for the rest, I'll leave the Americans to deal with you.
Raymond P. Scheel
has...@forest.drew.edu wrote:
<Snip previous quotes, rest edited to fit your screen>
> No, she is not in prison. Nor was she given a 25
> year sentence. 25 years is the *maximum* the girl
> can spend under the state's supervision; the way
> this case has been talked about implies that the
> 25 years is mandatory. That means juvenile dentention
> and/or jail. At the present time she is in Texas'
> version of juvenile detention. If she has not been
> paroled by the time she is an adult (I'm not sure
> how Texas defines this)she will go to jail.
When she turn 17, she will apppear before the parole
board. They will then determine: 1.) If she is no
longer a threat and can be released without further
time or probation. 2.) that she has generally
reformed and can be released on parole/suspended
sentence. 3.) that she is still a threat and should
be remanded to prison for the remainder of her term/
until paroled at a later date
This is still a bit simplified, and all sorts of
migitating circumstances are taken into consideration.
The actual policy on this is about 6 inches thick, but
this is a decent summary. Until she turns 17, she will
be in a juvenile facility with wards of similar ages.
Ray Scheel
These opinons and statements in this article are
strictly my own and are not an official comment,
statement, or declaration of policy of the Windham
School District or the Texas Department of Criminal
Justice--Institutional Division.
JoAnne Schmitz
On 27 Nov 1997 03:33:33 GMT, dryd...@aol.com (Drydusty) wrote:
>Sheesh, next you'll be telling me that 95% of all assaults and murders of NY
>City cabbies are perpetrated by blacks...or that 75% of the black male
>population of Baltimore ages 16-40 is either behind bars, on parole, or on
>probation. Obviously, urban UL's of the first order.
Obviously. According to "Hobbling a Generation: Young African American
Males in the Criminal Justice System of America's Cities: Baltimore,
Maryland," by Jerome G. Miller, September 1992:
[http://www.igc.apc.org/ncia/balhob.html]
"In April of this year, the National Center on Institutions and
Alternatives (NCIA) released a report which showed that 42% of the young
African American men in Washington, D.C. were immersed in the criminal
justice system.1 This report was the first analysis of the far-reaching
impact of the criminal justice system in an urban area.
"In the second of a series of studies on America's urban areas and their
criminal justice systems, NCIA has found that well over one- half of
Baltimore's African American males ages 18-35 are involved in the criminal
justice juggernaut daily. Of the 6O,715 African American males age 18-35 in
Baltimore, 56% were under criminal justice supervision on any given day in
1991.
"34,O25 of Baltimore's 6O,715 African American males ages 18 through 35
were either in jail or prison, on probation or parole, out on bond awaiting
disposition of criminal charges or being sought on an arrest warrant. These
shocking figures are only the most recent illustration of the dire
situation which confronts America's minority populations. When urban areas
are targeted, the numbers are daunting."
JoAnne "if it sounds like an Urban Legend..." Schmitz
Edward Rice
In article <01bcf87d$ab429840$364801cb@default>,
"Vicki Parslow-Stafford" <vl...@gil.com.au> wrote:
> Am I correct in thinking that the McCaugheys had had extensive media
> coverage prior to the birth, in relation to Mr & Mrs McCaughey's refusal
> to abort some of the foetuses in order to increase the chances of a
> healthy term pregnancy for the remaining foetuses?
>
> I may well be confusing the McCaughey's situation with another, but if
> not, I would guess that the Thompson family's relative lack of
assistance
> might be due to not having a savvy PR/media representative -- something
> that possibly a disadvantaged black family might not seek, or be
offered?
That's true, partly. Although, the McCaugheys (I can't spell it their way,
and I'm not sure you did, but You Know Who I Mean) actually went to some
effort to avoid publicity. There was none at all, not even the
announcement that Bobbi was multiply-pregnant, until she was five months
along.
The other thing is, the two cases really are somewhat different. One was
unsuccessful sextuplets (five surviving, which god knows is a ton of kids
anyway), and the other was seven-alive septuplets, which is believed to be
the first ever in the history of the world. Five-surviving is a minor
miracle of modern medical science (I'm too young to remember the Dionne
quintuplets in Canada but I have heard that 3-pound and 4-pound
birthweights are no longer considered amazing, partly thanks to the new
street-illegal drugs in our society) but it's no longer the incredible
once-in-a-lifetime event that it was in the '40's when the Dionnes were
born.
PS to "walker@dnvn" -- which Walker at VU are you, anyway? Wanted to send
e-mail.
Edward Rice
In article <19971127033...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
dryd...@aol.com (Drydusty) wrote:
> In a criminal context, yup. I don't care how young, or how sane,
someone is,
> if they are able to put the voluntary motor actions together to commit a
> heinous crime, they should be held accountable. I *might* be a bit
uneasy
> about executing a 6 year old...but if he committed a heinous crime, I
probably
> wouldn't lose much sleep over his execution.
Is it a heinous crime to burn down a home killing four sleeping people?
Is it a heinous crime for a child to play with matches and accidentally
light a larger fire than intended?
Lacking any mindwitnesses to the act, how do you tell which event occurred?
Drydusty
Joanne said, referring to my noting incredibly high rates of criminal activity
amongst black male youth in the U.S.:
>
>Obviously. According to "Hobbling a Generation: Young >African American
Males in the Criminal Justice System of >America's Cities: Baltimore,
Maryland," by Jerome G. Miller, >September 1992:
Careful, JoAnne: under modern-day political correctness protocols, pointing
out the grossly disproportionate-to-population amount of major crime committed
by young black males is easily considered racist.....even though it is an
undisputable fact.
"...and I always though `racism' was defined as a belief, **unsupported by
reliable, objective evidence**, that had a racial component associated with
it."
Drydusty
I said:
>> if they are able to put the voluntary motor actions together to commit a
> > heinous crime, they should be held accountable. I *might* be a bit
>>uneasy about executing a 6 year old...but if he committed a heinous crime, I
>>probably wouldn't lose much sleep over his execution.
to which Ed replied:
>Is it a heinous crime to burn down a home killing four sleeping people?
Yup.
>Is it a heinous crime for a child to play with matches and accidentally
>light a larger fire than intended?
>Lacking any mindwitnesses to the act, how do you tell which event occurred?
If an adult did it, reasonableness and foreseeability would be relevant
components of the analysis.
In this particular case, I am a bit prejudging, because in my hometown, there
were several incidents of "firebugs" who turned out to be pre-teens who set
fires for fun.
Yes, if I had my way, I would have executed them; preferably, having them be in
a slow burning structure, so the retributive experience would be quite lengthy,
to get the point across.
I categorize youthful firebugs in the same category as little kids that like to
torture and kill small, defenseless animals like baby birds, kittens and
puppies. If they are gonna do that kind of shit at such an early age, they are
definitely "bad seed," and have a 98% probability of getting worse with age.
I would just as soon purge the gene pool of them at that stage, rather than
wait for 'em to vent their sickness on a human being.
BTW, "Frontline" had a special on" children who kill" tonight in the states. I
recorded it, but expect a typical PBS pablum on how tragic it is for the child
perpetrators.....bullshit.
Maggie Newman
In article <17C371044ES...@msu.edu>, Kim <2132...@msu.edu> wrote:
>>I take it Caesarian births are sort of a new concept for you?
>
>Aw. Cut them some slack. They've only been doing c-sections for about
>2000 years. How can you expect 'em to keep up with medical technology
>like that?
>
The first reliable report of a c-section on a living woman dates back
500 years, not 2000. Caesarian births were not routinely performed on
healthy mothers until the 19th century. The c-sections of 2000 years
ago were a method of retrieving a newborn infant from a dead or dying
mother, not a delivery option.
Maggie "thanks for your contribution" Newman
Lon Stowell
Edward Rice <ehr...@his.com> wrote:
>Is it a heinous crime to burn down a home killing four sleeping people?
Well, no, if you do it fast enough you might keep the home from
killing those innocent people.
Mark Tye
James Linn wrote:
>
<snip multiple birth stuff>
>
> This may become a larger issue as time goes by, as I have seen other
> reports showing that at least in the North American
> group studied, that average male sperm motility is falling, hence an
> increased need for interventions in the future.
Does the "falling sperm counts/motility" meme strike anyone else as a
potential UL in the making?
I first heard about the decrease in sperm counts in the "respectable"
science press as a Hmm-isn't-this-curious item. Then it escaped into
the popular press, which gave it a Chicken-Little tone. When someone
mated decreasing sperm counts with the discovery that certain
organochlorenes found in the waste stream resemble estrogens and can
mimic their effects, environmentalists seized upon this as "proof"
that we're threatening the human race with extinction by poisoning
our environment. I've seen the connection bandied about as gospel
truth recently in the local "alternative" newspaper. It may well be
vectoring through the eco-sensitive segment of the public
consciousness at this very moment.
However, the science behind this conclusion is very shaky. Leaving
aside the unproven connection between organochlorenes in the
environment and the disruption of hormone systems in humans, there
is considerable doubt whether sperm counts are decreasing at all.
An article in the July 1996 issue of "Scientific American" (pg. 29)
reviews a study by Harry Fisch which re-examined the 1992 study
by Niels Skakkebaek. Skakkebaek's study indicated that sperm counts
had fallen between 1938 to 1990. Fisch discovered that Skakkebaek
had not controlled for geographical differences in sperm count,
which are surprisingly and inexplicably large. For example, men in
New York have unusually high sperm counts, 80% greater than men in
Los Angeles, in fact. New Yorkers comprised a large proportion
(87%) of Skakkebaek's pre-1970 data, but only 25% of his post-1970
data. Fisch concluded that Skakkebaek's apparent decline in sperm
counts could be explained by the geographical differences.
While Fisch's study is unlikely to be the last word, it does make
it harder to draw a direct connection between pollution and human
fertility. I doubt this will slow the "falling sperm counts" meme
down much. It has a humanity-threatened-by-unintended-consequences-
of-technology-hubris appeal (Go, go, Godzilla!) that's much greater
than boring, uncertain science.
So if it takes off, will it qualify as a UL, or just another
scientific misconception?
-- Mark "I'm from Chicago, and I'm that's as personal as I'm
going to get" Tye
E-mail reply hint: Have you driven a fnord lately? Didn't think so.
The facts and opinions expressed herein are ficticious. Any
similarity to real opinions, belonging to either the author or
his employer, is coincidental and not intended by the author.
cze...@nospamus.oracle.com
Mark Tye wrote:
> So if it takes off, will it qualify as a UL, or just another
> scientific misconception?
I think that the consensus view on afu lately is that
it depends on *how* it takes off. If it just gets
passed around as an "interesting fact" - "did you
know that sperm counts are falling and pollution is to
blame?" then we would file it under scientific
misconception. If, however, it picks up a moral tone
such as "just rewards for our thoughtless actions"
or even - gods forbid - "Gaia takes care of herself
by eliminating those nasty, polluting humans" then
it would be more ULish.
If it becomes a story about a specific person - "a FOAF knew
a couple who couldn't conceive, finally they had his
sperm counted and it came out as zero! They realised
that their drinking water, which came from a well, was
polluted with run-off from a factory chicken farm. They
started drinking bottled water instead, and six weeks
later she was pregnant. Later they sued the chicken farm
and won!" - then it's definitely ULish. Once it becomes
told of more than one couple in different locations or at
different times, it is undoubtedly a UL.
Joseph Michael Bay
Mark Tye <mt...@fnord.com> writes:
>However, the science behind this conclusion is very shaky. Leaving
>aside the unproven connection between organochlorenes in the
>environment and the disruption of hormone systems in humans, there
>is considerable doubt whether sperm counts are decreasing at all.
Geez, I wish I could remember the names of the epidemiologists who were
interviewed on NPR this past Saturday. Anyway, they said yeah, the sperm
counts are going down, and that it's mainly in industrialized countries.
They didn't say anything about the reason (good epidemiologists never do),
but did mention that low sperm count != infertility.
>which are surprisingly and inexplicably large. For example, men in
>New York have unusually high sperm counts, 80% greater than men in
>Los Angeles, in fact.
Fuckin' A.--
J. Michael Bay ( ) official business (x) bozo
Stanford University ( ) unofficial business (x) not a bozo
Medical School (x) other ( ) who, me?
"Urine is wonderful . . . I'm high on urine." -- Bruce Ames
mitcho
Joseph Michael Bay wrote:
> Geez, I wish I could remember the names of the epidemiologists who were
> interviewed on NPR this past Saturday. Anyway, they said yeah, the sperm
> counts are going down, and that it's mainly in industrialized countries.
Before this goes too far, I'd like to know how anyone can measure sperm
counts across a population. No one has ever counted my sperms, and I
don't anticipate anyone ever doing so as long as I stay reasonably
healthy and strong enough to fend off any sperm counters who might want
to compel a count from me involuntarily.
Shurely most of the men whose sperms are being counted are having their
sperms counted as part of fertility treatments, and can therefore be
presumed to be likely to have something wonky going on Down There.
Other men responding to ads of the "Let us count your sperms for $50"
variety self-select themselves. The Rest of Us glide through life with
our sperms uncounted.
So are sperm counts really declining? Who knows and how can they tell?
Also: Who cares one way or t'other?
Bob Hiebert
jm...@leland.Stanford.EDU (Joseph Michael Bay) wrote:
>Mark Tye <mt...@fnord.com> writes:
>
>>However, the science behind this conclusion is very shaky. Leaving
>>aside the unproven connection between organochlorenes in the
>>environment and the disruption of hormone systems in humans, there
>>is considerable doubt whether sperm counts are decreasing at all.
>
>interviewed on NPR this past Saturday. Anyway, they said yeah, the sperm
>counts are going down, and that it's mainly in industrialized countries.
>but did mention that low sperm count != infertility.
>
>>which are surprisingly and inexplicably large. For example, men in
>>New York have unusually high sperm counts, 80% greater than men in
>>Los Angeles, in fact.
Well, this sort of addresses both of your comments. Here is part of a
transcript from National Public Radio from May 1, 1996.
Begin fair uses extract of copyrighted transcript
-------
A new study is casting doubt on claims that sperm counts have been declining
around the world. Four years ago, a Danish research team published a report
suggesting that sperm counts had declined sharply over the past 50 years.
This observation is often cited by scientists worried that hormone-like
chemicals in the environment could be harming human health and possibly even
jeopardizing the future of the species. The new report suggests that the
original research was flawed. NPR's Richard Harris reports.
RICHARD HARRIS, Reporter: Following the Danish report suggesting that sperm
counts are on the decline around the world, researchers in France and
Finland reported results that seemed to confirm the trend in those
countries. So, Harry Fisch [sp] at the Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center
in New York City says he expected to find the same thing when he studied
trends from the three largest sperm banks in the United States.
HARRY FISCH, Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center: Everybody was implicating
environmental toxins as a cause for the decline- for the supposed decline in
sperm counts in Europe, so, you know, it seemed reasonable that there would
be a decline in sperm counts in the United States, but that really was not
the case.
RICHARD HARRIS: His report is published in the May issue of the journal
Fertility and Sterility. It finds that sperm counts since 1970 are holding
steady or possibly even increasing slightly among men who are banking sperm
prior to vasectomies in New York, Minnesota and Los Angeles.
HARRY FISCH: But what was surprising was that there were geographical
differences between the three different locations. We found that sperm
counts were highest in New York, then Minnesota, and lowest in California.
RICHARD HARRIS: Fisch says he can't explain that just yet. It could be due
to ethnic differences in the donor population, something to do with men's
lifestyles, or their environment. But Dr. Fisch says this unexpected
geographic variability was not taken into account by the Danish study, and
he says that invalidates their results.
HARRY FISCH: What they did was they compared apples and oranges. They
compared sperm counts from one location at one time to a different location
at a different time. For example, 93 percent of the men studied before 1970
in the original study from Denmark was from New York, and very few were from
New York after 1970. So they were comparing areas of high- where sperm
counts are high to areas where sperm counts were low. So even if you- if you
discount our study completely, what we did realize from our study was that
there are geographical variabilities in sperm counts. So, am I confident in
that there is no decline? I'm absolutely confident that there has been no
decline in sperm counts in the past 25 years. Remember, that's as long as
we've studied these patients.
--------
This UL is as clear as milk
Bob
MORI...@maine.maine.edu
Good Morning,
Assuming these are atmospheric sperm counts, isn't
this a good thing? Regards, John
Lee Boyle
On Thu, 04 Dec 1997 08:02:47 -0800, mitcho <mit...@netcom.com> wrote:
>Joseph Michael Bay wrote:
>
>
>Shurely most of the men whose sperms are being counted are having their
>sperms counted as part of fertility treatments, and can therefore be
>presumed to be likely to have something wonky going on Down There.
When you "presume", you make an ass .. no wait a minute. Nevermind.
I would assume that most men whose sperms are being counted are having
their sperms counted because their womenfolk are failing to conceive.
In a good percentage of such tests, the men should be expected to be
completely normal. We could presume that the statistics are based
on the sperm counts of the men who are considered to be within normal
limits. They might also have found that a larger percentage of the
men being tested have something wonky going on, but that could also
be attributed to a decline in women's fertility problems increasing
the chances that it's the man's fault.
I'm not convinced that it's fair to compare industrialized to non-
industrialized sperm counts, since the number of non-industrialized
sperm counts performed in a year is, presumably, small enough to be
statistical noise.
Lee "mption" Boyle
GrapeApe
>So are sperm counts really declining? Who knows and how can they tell?
>Also: Who cares one way or t'other?
The Teller at the Sperm Bank?
There may be some stats on the range of expected sperm counts that can be taken
from a wider sample than merely those who can't conceive. Sperm banks would be
sampling other wankers as well, so their numbers may not necessarily be as
biased towards the low end.
Joseph Michael Bay
<MORI...@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> writes:
>Assuming these are atmospheric sperm counts, isn't
>this a good thing? Regards, John
Atmospheric sperm counts?
Joe "Better wear my rubbers" Bay
Cambias
In article <B0A9CEDA9...@ehrice.his.com>, ehr...@his.com (Edward
Rice) wrote:
<snippo the text to save it from communism>
>
> The other thing is, the two cases really are somewhat different. One was
> unsuccessful sextuplets (five surviving, which god knows is a ton of kids
> anyway), and the other was seven-alive septuplets, which is believed to be
> the first ever in the history of the world. Five-surviving is a minor
> miracle of modern medical science (I'm too young to remember the Dionne
> quintuplets in Canada but I have heard that 3-pound and 4-pound
> birthweights are no longer considered amazing, partly thanks to the new
> street-illegal drugs in our society) but it's no longer the incredible
> once-in-a-lifetime event that it was in the '40's when the Dionnes were
> born.
>
Um... I was a four-pounder back in 1966, and my mother didn't indulge in
any drugs other than coffee with chicory, and a little wine. Despite the
flap about "crack babies" I haven't actually seen any evidence that the
number of low-birthweight babies has increased. Possibly the number of
surviving low-birthweight kids has gone up, but that's probably not due to
the illegal drug trade.
Anyone have any FACTS on this topic?
Cambias
Len J Lester
I heard the highest sperm counts were found in prison.
Joseph Michael Bay wrote in message <665epf$4...@amy7.Stanford.EDU>...
>Mark Tye <mt...@fnord.com> writes:
>
>>However, the science behind this conclusion is very shaky. Leaving
>>aside the unproven connection between organochlorenes in the
>>environment and the disruption of hormone systems in humans, there
>>is considerable doubt whether sperm counts are decreasing at all.
>
>Geez, I wish I could remember the names of the epidemiologists who were
>interviewed on NPR this past Saturday. Anyway, they said yeah, the sperm
>counts are going down, and that it's mainly in industrialized countries.
>They didn't say anything about the reason (good epidemiologists never do),
>but did mention that low sperm count != infertility.
>
>>which are surprisingly and inexplicably large. For example, men in
>>New York have unusually high sperm counts, 80% greater than men in
>>Los Angeles, in fact.
>
>Fuckin' A.--
JoAnne Schmitz
On Thu, 4 Dec 1997 12:34:15 EST, <MORI...@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> wrote:
>Good Morning,
>
>Assuming these are atmospheric sperm counts, isn't
>this a good thing? Regards, John
Depends. What kind of atmosphere do you want to breathe, John?
Regards, JoAnne
-------------
Please note that my return address has been changed to thwart spammers.
Remove the capital letter middle initial.
Glenn Dowdy
Joseph Michael Bay wrote:
>
> <MORI...@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> writes:
>
> >Assuming these are atmospheric sperm counts, isn't
> >this a good thing? Regards, John
>
>
No, they don't. HTH.
> Joe "Better wear my rubbers" Bay
> --
Glenn "Please do so" Dowdy
Phil Edwards
mitcho <mit...@netcom.com> wrote:
>No one has ever counted my sperms, and I
>don't anticipate anyone ever doing so as long as I stay reasonably
>healthy and strong enough to fend off any sperm counters who might want
>to compel a count from me involuntarily.
It's "men banking sperm prior to a vasectomy", apparently.
I wasn't going to post to this thread, but I just felt there was a UL
waiting to happen in there somewhere. The Mickey Finn, the lipsticked
message on the mirror, the, er, Kleenex...
Phil "and besides, all my watched threads are full of strange
Australians" Edwards
--
Phil Edwards amroth(at)zetnet.co.uk
"One last chance at ignorance!" - SFA
Michele Tepper
Phil Edwards <amr...@zetnet.co.uk.NOJUNK> wrote:
>
>Phil "and besides, all my watched threads are full of strange
>Australians" Edwards
You should cal your superintendant -- it's the landlord's responsibility
to have that looked into.
Michele "no, really, that and some cedar" Tepper
--
Michele Tepper "In Europe, we all think you're barbaric!"
mte...@panix.com -- Jon Langford, in Chicago
Michael Ames Connor
> >So are sperm counts really declining? Who knows and how can they tell?
>
> >Also: Who cares one way or t'other?
Many studies have shown this; the scholarly medical literature
refers to it as a demonstrated phenomenon. For one summary, with
subsequent articles detailing the discussion:
http://www.monitor.net/rachel/r448.html.
We care because pollutants appear to be messing with our bodies'
ability to function normally. Artificial hormones are strongly correlated
with all sorts of problems, including breast and testicular cancer. If we
want to live healthy lives, and if we want our triple-great grandkids to
have healthy lives, we need to create different ways to live, without
toxins flooding our bodies and the rest of the blue marble.
In solidarity,
Michael Ames Connor//mco...@reed.edu
member, Portland Association of Teachers
Mike Holmans
Len J Lester <whyl...@email.msn.com> felt like saying:
>I heard the highest sperm counts were found in prison.
>
>
so to speak?
I ask because I can see this being adduced by someone as the reason why
there is so much homosexual intercourse in jails, and how it explains
other behaviours, and justifies all sorts of ingredients for prison food
or regime.
I'm less interested, really, in how much voracetate there is in the
factoid than in how the factoid is employed. Even if it is true, I'll
bet it's misquoted in many ways, and many leaps of illogic made. It
could be said to be because criminal types have higher sperm counts,
from which you could get a fine conspiracy going about sperm donors
being screened so as to identify potential criminals. Or it could be
because confining a large number of men together with no heterosexual
outlet increases the sperm count, and therefore the prisoners become
more prone to criminality. Or other chains. And from these follow
different effects or penological practices.
I'd be interested, therefore, to know if this is being told in different
places and what is happening as a result, if anything.
Mike "anyone else seed this?" Holmans
The exciting AFU FAQ, and many other things, may be found at
http://www.urbanlegends.com
Ryan Paige
So why all the hub-bub about high inner-city birth rates. I would assume
that pollution in the inner cities would be higher than out in places
like Amarillo, Texas, therefore, eventually maybe all this inner city
welfare stuff will work itself out in the end.
Ryan "No, I'm not really serious" Paige