What day is tomorrow?

Philip has left a new comment on your post, "The Conficker C worm coming April 1?"

Is it just me or are many of you guys missing out on the date: April 1. It seems that all this media ruckus is not only uncalled for but is actually very disheartening. I don't think the conficker virus will be able to get out on that date, April 1 is as dangerous as any other date. To be sure, it makes sense to just remove the worm from your computer, and I think that has been taken cared of here.

Thanks!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Philip,

Thank you for writing. No doubt most of our readers are aware of the significance of April 1. It's a little like a full moon isn't it which brings out the crazies.

If you haven't already we strongly recommend you watch the 60 Minutes segment (about 13 minutes) hosted by Lesley Stahl which is posted on this site ("A must watch video!" - March 30, 2009) that aired the previous evening on CBS.

Sincerely,

Clare L. Pieuk

The 140 character defamation - punctuation included!

Twittigation: Courtney Love sued for Twitter defamation
Eriq Gardner, Reuters

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) • Twitter has become popular with celebrities. And people pretending to be celebrities.

Sometimes it's hard to figure out who's who.

Shaquille O'Neal? Yup, his Twitter account is real. That's him.

50 Cent? Not exactly. The rapper hired a guy to tweet for him.

Britney Spears? She's got a whole cadre tweeting for her. So not really.

Christopher Walken? Imposter!

Courtney Love? Oh boy is that her.

In fact, Love just won the distinction of being the first celebrity sued for tweeting.

In Los Angeles Superior Court, clothes designer Dawn Simorangkir, also known as Boudoir Queen, last Thursday filed suit against Love for defamation, invasion of privacy and infliction of emotional distress for "an extensive rant" on Twitter about how she was billed for custom clothing.

It's hard to be extensive when one is limited to just 140 characters. But if anybody can do it, it's Love, who allegedly wrote grammatically challenged comments like "oi vey don't f--- with my wardrobe or you will end up in a circle of corched eaeth hunted til your dead."

"Whether caused by a drug induced psychosis, a warped understanding of reality, or the belief that her money and fame allow her to disregard the law, Love has embarked (o)n what is nothing short of an obsessive and delusional crusade to terrorize and destroy Simorangkir, Simorangkir's reputation and her livelihood," says the complaint.

Love's spokesman declined to comment on the lawsuit.
(Editing by Dean Goodman at Reuters)

A bong is a bong is a bong!

SunflowerPipes has left a new comment on your post "President WEED WHACKER!"

I respect Obama he is a talented politician, President Obama seems to posse’s insightful, reasonable judgment on many issues, although in the case of marijuana prohibition laws I find Obama’s choice to answer with mocking humor to be lacking. Smoking marijuana is an easy thing to laugh about, it seems there is something about being stoned that brings a smile to people’s faces, however, marijuana prohibition is not a joke.

We should not be making jokes as millions of Americans are arrested for being caught on the wrong side of moral politicking, we should not laugh as we spend over 30 billion dollars a year going after Americans for smoking weed, we should not giggle and poke fun as we watch billions of dollars in tax revenue slip through our fingers each year, and should we not be jolly as thousands of people are murdered by cartels profiting from America’s moral hypocrisy.

I believe there are profound latent consequences in prohibition that are not even factored into our assessments of the effects of illegality, such as how we view the rule of law and the role of law enforcement in the community, the divisiveness between users and non users, the stigma of mental shock of incarceration. I say pot prohibition is no joke it has real costs paid for in real lives. Freedom is achieved in a country by placing responsibility in the hands of the citizen and not by the state legally enforcing morality. SunflowerPipes.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear SunflowerPipes:

Thank you for writing one of the more insightful, reasoned letters we've received. With marijauna use so pervasive and a judiciary overwhelmed trying to keep up it makes imminent sense to legalize it subject, of course, to checks and balances.

Sorry for our levity but a lot of truth is spoken in jest. The baseball player is South Korean relief pitcher Jung-Keun Bong who spent a few years in the majors with Atlanta and Cincinnati. After a particularly difficult outing when he was "touched" for 6 runs, one enterprising American sportswriter couldn't resist, "He really got smoked in the 7th!"

Sincerely,

Clare L. Pieuk

Handsome, dashing, movie star good looks .....

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post, "Your identity!"

Will Goodon looks like that guy on Seinfeld who called Jerry a phony and later got his hands caught in the trunk.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Anonymous:

Thank you for writing. We were never Seinfeld fans so unfortunately your humour is lost on us. However, you must admit he's a handsome, dashing young chap. Conservation Manitoba and our duck population must love him these days.

Sincerely,

Clare L. Pieuk

Air miles for Metis economic stimulus dollars?

Denise Thomas

Jack Park

Claire Riddle
Will Goodon

David Chartrand

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post, "Your Identity!"

The Metis Economic Stimulus Package requested by the Metis National Council and President Chartrand of the Manitoba Metis Federation was discussed this past weekend in Ottawa - must have came in the form of air mile credits.

We understand Denise Thomas, MMF Vice-President Southeast Regional Office took a delegation from Manitoba to Harrison Hot Springs, British Columbia; fellow Provincial Board Members Jack Park and Claire Riddle were left consulting with Will Goodon and Federation Senior Policy Advisor Al Benoit in Ottawa; while President Chartrand and others were off to deal with Labour Market Developments in Vancouver.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Anonymous:

Thank you for writing. Sounds like the MMF-MNC didn't get many economic stimulus dollars but at least got some air mile credits. Sounds like everyone had a good time which is what it's all about right?

Sincerely,

Clare L. Pieuk

Your identity!

http://lawiscool.com/

Good Day Readers:

Found the article below on a site we regularly visit operated by law school students across Canada. It prompted us to reiterate our policy regarding your identity.

If you contact us as "Anonymous" your e-mail arrives as Anonymous[noreply-comment@blogger.com]. Therefore, we have no way of identifying you from your address.

Should, for example, we try to reach you seeking clarification on something you've said our electronic letter comes bouncing back as undeliverable.

The only way you can be identified is by your computer's unique IPS (Internet Service Provider) number which leaves an electronic trail whever you go. However, it has no meaning for us because it's simply a series of digits. Authorities would only be allowed to access this information under Court Order which would leave us no choice since refusing could mean being cited for contempt.

"The Hacker!

As you'll read shortly in the first of our series, "The Hacker!" Google in the United States with permission of the Blogger worked with a Canadian computer science engineer to identify who and where the culprit was located using ISPs. You'll be surprised.

Our policy has always been and shall remain, we reserve the right to all final editoral content. Inappropriate language and potentially defamatory material will either be removed or altered.

Sincerely,

Clare L. Pieuk

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Be Careful What You Post For

By: Ryan MacIsaac

March 28, 2009

Filed Under Media Law, Privacy, Privacy Law, Technology · Add Comment

Following a trend of the erosion of privacy rights online, an Ontario couple who own a far-right website were ordered to disclose the names of eight anonymous posters related to a defamation lawsuit.

The owners of FreeDominion.ca, Mark Fournier and Connie Wilkins-Fournier, were told that they would have to reveal the names of anonymous posters who attacked Ottawa anti-hate-speech activist Richard Warman. He is suing the couple, alleging that they “falsely and maliciously published and circulated” defamatory comments about him. The Fourniers argued against the disclosure saying that posters on their site behave differently under the shroud of anonymity than as if they were publicly identified.

Ontario Superior Court Judge Stanley Kershman decided that “the defendants are under an obligation to disclose all documents in their power and control.” He cited a case from 2004 in which it was stated that privacy rights must be balanced with the public interest and the rights of others. He also cited a more recent child pornography case in which the judge found that there was “no reasonable expectation of privacy” with respect to ISP disclosure of customer information (this case is discussed in detail at LawIsCool here).

U of O professor Michael Geist disagreed on his blog with the argument that the disclosure of the posters’ information was essential to protection of the public interest:

"Protection for anonymous postings is certainly not an absolute, but a high threshold that requires prima facie evidence supporting the plaintiff’s claim is critical to ensuring that a proper balance is struck between the rights of a plaintiff… and the privacy and free speech rights of the poster. … I fear that the high threshold seems to have been abandoned here."

So as the blogger wars heat up below, keep in mind while posting that you can’t always hide behind the anonymity of the Internet.

A Google blogger warning!

Good Day Folks:

If you'e watched the 60 Minutes video below you'll notice there's discussion of warnings Google is now sending. Here's one we received the other day while Googling for a particular piece on Barack Obama:

http://cybersmokeblog.blogspot.com - ACTION REQUIRED
Sent: Thu 3/26/2009 1:06 PM
To: pieuk@shaw.ca

Hello,

Your blog at http://cybersmokeblog.blogspot.com/ has been identified as a potential spam blog. To correct this, please request a review by filling out the form at http://www.blogger.com/unlock-blog.g?lockedBlogID=23477238.

Your blog will be deleted in 20 days if it isn't reviewed, and your readers will see a warning page during this time. After we receive your request, we'll review your blog and unlock it within two business days. Once we have reviewed and determined your blog is not spam, the blog will be unlocked and the message in your Blogger dashboard will no longer be displayed. If this blog doesn't belong to you, you don't have to do anything, and any other blogs you may have won't be affected.

We find spam by using an automated classifier. Automatic spam detection is inherently fuzzy, and occasionally a blog like yours is flagged incorrectly. We sincerely apologize for this error.

By using this kind of system, however, we can dedicate more storage, bandwidth, and engineering resources to bloggers like you instead of to spammers. For more information, please see Blogger Help: http://help.blogger.com/bin/answer.py?answer=42577

Thank you for your understanding and for your help with our spam-fighting efforts.

Sincerely,
The Blogger Team

P.S. Just one more reminder: Unless you request a review, your blog will be deleted in 20 days. Click this link to request the review: http://www.blogger.com/unlock-blog.g?lockedBlogID=23477238

Next we noticed the Blogger Dashboard where the username and password must be entered before being able to post to your site bore the message:

This blog has been locked due to possible Terms of Service violations. You may not publish new posts until your plog is reviewed and unlocked. This Blog will be deleted within 20 days unless you request a review. Request Unlock Review

We asked for a review and within an hour our system had been restored. You are unable to reply directly to Google's original e-mail but if you carefully watch their message line you'll notice You replied on 3/26/2009 2:11 PM will appear in blue.

You can still post while Google is checking your blog except there's an added step. You'll have to type in the jumbled letters used on many sites to discourage spamming. And no we're not spammers - first time anything like this has happened.

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk

A must watch video!

Watch CBS Videos Online

Good Day Readers:

This is an outstanding report by Lesley Stahl which appeared on last night's edition of CBS's 60 Minutes. It will bring you up-to-date on the latest internet viruses, worms and malware and what computer experts are doing to combat the threat. Highly recommended!
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk

Is "The Public Eye" watching you?

Good Day Folks:

The Public Eye has rapidly become one of our favorite Bloggers. While certain lawyers may not share this view, the information provided about Law Society disciplinary hearings has been nothing short of invaluable.

Truth To Power

www.accesstoinfo.blogspot.com

This is the fourth or fifth multiple count complaint (We're into double digits!) filed against Paul Victor Walsh with the Law Society of Manitoba - we've lost count of the convictions. Makes one wonder if it's possible to get disbarred here?

Sincerely,

Clare L. Pieuk

Allan Fineblit, Chief Executive Officer

afineblit@lawsociety.mb.ca

rporcher@lawsociety.mb.ca

philipslayton@hotmail.com

Manitoba Lawyer Paul Walsh

The Law Society of Manitoba Discipline Case Digest

Case 07-02

Member: Paul Victor Walsh, Q.C.

Jurisdiction: Winnipeg, Manitoba

Called to the Bar: June 26, 1968

Particulars of Charges: Professional Misconduct (3 counts)

- Breach of Chapter 16, Commentary 3 of the Code (breach of obligation to treat other lawyers with courtesy and good faith) [x2]

- Breach of Chapter 1 of the Code (failure to act with integrity when dealing with an unrepresented party opposite) and

Breach of Chapter 16 of the Code (failure to act with courtesy and good faith)

Date of Hearing: March 20, 2007

Panel:

- Joel A. Weinstein, Q.C. (Chair)

- John E. Neufeld, Q.C.

- Lori Ferguson Sain

Disposition:

- 3 month Suspension (concurrent with 6 month suspension that commenced on January 1, 2007)

- Fine of $10,000.00

- Costs of $4,500.00

Counsel:

- Darcia A.C. Senft for The Law Society of Manitoba

- J. Richard Wolson, Q.C. for the Member

_____________________________________________

Breach of Undertaking

_____________________________________________

Facts

Mr. Walsh was retained by his client with respect to a default on a commercial lease. Mr. Walsh’s client was the landlord of commercial premises operating as a restaurant. The tenant had defaulted on the lease and had abandoned the premises. When Mr. Walsh pursued the restaurant on behalf of his client, he was advised that the lease had been assigned to another corporation and was referred to their in-house counsel. Mr. Walsh wrote to the restaurant’s representative and their counsel regarding the commercial lease matter. Various letters were exchanged between the parties in relation to attempts to sell the commercial property to a third party. While the negotiations on the deal were progressing, Mr. Walsh filed a Statement of Claim on behalf of his client against the tenant and the defendant assignee corporation with respect to the said commercial lease matter.

Shortly thereafter, Mr. Walsh received correspondence from the president of a related company regarding a proposed purchase of the commercial property. In the letter, Mr. Walsh was instructed to contact the company’s counsel who was the same in-house counsel that Mr. Walsh had written to previously. That counsel subsequently advised Mr. Walsh that efforts were being made to sell the property to a third party purchaser and thereby settle the commercial lease matter. Mr. Walsh was asked to provide two weeks notice of his intention to proceed with the law suit and the obligation to file a Statement of Defence. Mr. Walsh wrote back and advised that he was not proceeding with the Statement of Claim that had been filed. As requested, he undertook to provide two weeks notice of his intention to proceed with the said claim.

Approximately one month later, the other lawyer wrote to Mr. Walsh to advise that attempts to sell the property had failed. Mr. Walsh filed a second Statement of Claim of behalf of his client against the related company with respect to the same commercial lease matter. He effected service of both claims upon the defendant corporations without providing notice to or advising the other lawyer. Mr. Walsh obtained a Notice of Default in respect of the first claim and attempted to obtain default judgment with respect to the second claim without first advising or warning the other lawyer of his intentions and without making an enquiry regarding the filing of a Statement of Defence.

Subsequently, Mr. Walsh received a telephone call from a director of a defendant corporation, which defendant, at that time, was an unrepresented party opposite. During the said telephone conversation with the director, Mr. Walsh discussed whether or not the defendant corporation was the appropriate defendant in the first claim. He did not advise the director that default had been noted already against the defendant corporation in respect of the first claim. Mr. Walsh then wrote to the director and advised, inter alia, that a Statement of Claim had been filed and served upon the defendant corporation. However, in his letter, Mr. Walsh did not advise the director that default had been noted already against the defendant corporation in respect of the first claim for failing to file a Statement of Defence.

The director responded to Mr. Walsh by letter and requested that the defendant corporation be released from the action. Following his receipt of the said letter, Mr. Walsh did not inform the director that default had been noted already against the defendant corporation.

Plea

Mr. Walsh entered a plea of guilty to the charges.

Decision and Comments

The panel found Mr. Walsh guilty of professional misconduct based on his admissions to the charges.

Penalty

Noting that the conduct predated the conduct for which Mr. Walsh recently began serving a period of suspension, the panel accepted a joint recommendation made by the Society and counsel for Mr. Walsh and ordered that:

(a) Mr. Walsh be suspended for a period of 3 months, which suspension will be served concurrently with a 6 month suspension that commenced on January 1, 2007;

(b) Mr. Walsh pay a fine in the amount of $10,000.00; and

(c) Mr. Walsh pay costs to the Society in the amount of $4,500.00 as a contribution towards the costs associated with the investigation, prosecution and hearing of the matter.

President WEED WHACKER!

"Ouch! Ouch! stop Mr. President you're hurting us!"

Good Day Folks:

You've got to love longtime Boston Herald columnist Margery Eagan's latest article, Yes We Cannabis? Joint Resolution: Taxing pot just makes cents.

We were checking out the latest on our beloved Celtics when we happened upon it.

This rotational Weed Man ad was embedded in the article - the irony wasn't lost on us. Jeez, imagine going down in history as, "Former President WEED WHACKER!" At least he'd be remembered for being a green President which is more than can be said for Prime Minister Stephen "Don't call me Steve!" Harper. We'll send Ms Eagan a copy of our posting to show how much we enjoyed today's column.

Clare L. Pieuk

meagan@bostonherald.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WEED WHACKER: The President said in his town hall meeting on Thursday that legalizing marijuana would't be a 'good strategy.'

Yes We Cannabis? Joint Resolution: Taxing Pot just makes cents

By Margery Eagan, Boston Herald Columnst
Sunday, March 29, 2009

It’s time to legalize marijuana, tax it to death, then let struggling Joe Citizen - instead of Joe Dope Dealer - reap the pot profits.

The most popular question at President Obama’s town hall meeting Thursday? Whether legalizing marijuana would help the economy and create jobs. You know: Pottery Barn goes Pottery Bong.

Now the pot posse may have stacked the e-mail deck. Still Obama, who once wanted to decriminalize pot, laughed off the inquiries. “I don’t know what this says about the online audience,” he quipped, then did his post-election about-face. “No, I don’t think this would be a good strategy.”

Actually, it would be a very good strategy. He’s wrong. Enough already with these ancient mariner moralizers like ex-drug czar Bill Bennett, who preached reefer madness while gambling millions in Vegas and smoking two packs a day. A different generation’s in charge now. Millions of Americans understand that you can get stoned in high school, in college, every post-collegiate Saturday night, yet remain a responsible, upstanding, taxpayer. They know because they’ve done it.

Ignoring hysterical politicians and law enforcement types around here, Massachusetts voted nearly two to one in November to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana. Has your neighborhood gone to pot? If we took the next step - legalize and tax it - we might not need toll hikes or 19-cent gas tax hikes and they’d surely be hiring at “Roach Brothers,” or “Best Buds,” or maybe even, I can’t resist, “Restoration Weed-Wear.”

If we legalized nationwide, we’d save billions immediately in enforcement and jailing costs. We’d reap many billions more per year in taxes. When Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron published his legalize-pot tax estimates in 2005, more than 500 professional economists, including Milton Friedman, signed on.

Miron was on CNN this week discussing the horrific drug war on the Mexico/U.S. border. He’s long argued that violence is the inevitable norm in illegal, not legal, markets, whether in drugs, gambling, prostitution, or alcohol. We just never learn.

But legalizing pot isn’t only about money. It’s about our ridiculous citizen passivity. Why do we let congressional liars and thieves dictate what we can do, responsibly, in our living rooms? Who are they to take away our children’s student loans over a joint?

NORML (The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws) typically gets about $900 a day in online donations. Thursday and Friday, they got $3,500 each day.

“By every possible metric I can employ,” said NORML’s executive director, Allen St. Pierre, “these last 24 hours have been the busiest I’ve seen.”

Though St. Pierre was disappointed with Obama’s flip-flop Thursday, he also knows the president could be his best advertisement. You may not like Obama’s politics, but nobody would argue that pot-smoking and cocaine-snorting scrambled Obama’s brain.

Herald Pulse

Should marijuana be legalized and taxed?

Yes
No
Not sure

Please stay tuned!

NetBizSavvy has left a new comment on your post, "Why not help us write your great Canadian online novel!"

I find your blog very interesting. It was worth a read. Thanks for sharing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear NBS:

Thank you for writing and the kind words. We hope you'll stay tuned. In the immortal words of American comedian legend Jimmy Durante:

"You ain't seen nothin' yet Folks!"

Shortly we'll begin the first in our series, "The Hacker!" which will take readers behind the scenes for a firsthand look deep into an ongoing investigation of a Canadian Blog compromised by an American source. We've already contacted the Royal Canadian Mounted Police's Computer Crimes Unit (Winnipeg) requesting information about the law and penalties here. Should be truly fascinating!

Coming soon ..... "The Hacker!"

We'll also have a lot more to say soon about each of the Plaintiffs and their lawyer Murray Norman Trachtenberg gleaned from public court records in the Manitoba Metis Federation taxpayer financed alleged defamation lawsuit (Court of Queen's File Number CI 05-01-41955) against the now defunct www.CyberSmokeSignals.com. Hope you'll stay with us.

Sincerely,

Clare L. Pieuk

The Public Eye's back!

Truth To Power

www.accesstoinfo.blogspot.com

The Public Eye has left a new commeon on your post, "Why not help us write your great Canadian novel!"

"Free speech doesn't mean careless talk" - sort of a nice, unofficial motto for the MMF, wouldn't you say?

Blog: Truth to Power
Post: The Federation of Malaysia

http://accesstoinfo.blogspot.com/2009/03/federation-of-malaysia.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Federation of Malaysia

Malaysia: End Ban on Opposition Papers

Two Newspapers Shut Down Ahead of Elections As originally posted on: Human Rights Watch March 25, 2009

(New York) - Malaysia's Home Ministry should immediately rescind its order suspending publication of two opposition party newspapers, Human Rights Watch said today. Human Rights Watch also called for repeal of the 1984 Printing Presses and Publications Act.

On March 23, the Home Ministry notified the opposition party Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) and its coalition partner Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS) that they were prohibited from publishing their respective party newspapers, Suara Keadilan and Harakah, for three months. With three key by-elections scheduled for April 7, 2009, the ban will harm the parties' ability to inform and rally voters. Both parties plan to go ahead with distribution of this week's publications, which are already in print.

No official reason accompanied the ministry's action, although in later reports Home Ministry officials said the papers were banned for publishing reports that contravened the ministry's guidelines and permit conditions. Home Minister Datuk Sri Syed Hamid Albar said that the newspapers "were still publishing untrue stories after they were given warnings." He also said that the stories aimed to "instill hatred for the government and leaders."

"The government may argue it is banning party papers over concern for citizens' welfare, but this is unfair political warfare in disguise," said Elaine Pearson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "Malaysia's citizens deserve better from their elected leaders."

Despite constitutional guarantees to freedom of expression, the draconian Printing Presses and Publications Act effectively silences criticism of the Malaysian government by requiring newspapers to renew publishing licenses annually. According to the law, the minister's discretion to grant, revoke, or suspend licenses is "absolute" and not subject to judicial review.

Suara Keadilan has faced government interference since it received its first printing permit less than a year ago, eight years after its initial application. In September 2008, the Home Ministry instructed PKR to "show cause" why its publication license should not be suspended after it reported incorrectly that Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan became paralyzed after heart surgery. In February 2009, the government attempted to limit circulation by confiscating thousands of copies from distributors and warning them against selling the newspaper. It is unclear if Suara Keadilan circulation is limited to PKR party members.

On February 11, the authorities seized copies of Harakah, in print for 22 years without suspension. On February 26, PAS received a letter from the Home Ministry that it was in violation of its permit in part because Harakah reported on non-party matters.

A third member of the opposition coalition, Parti Tindakan Demokratik (DAP), has been trying unsuccessfully to renew the license of Rocket, the party paper, since December 2008."

Much of Malaysia's mainstream media, with ties to Malaysia's ruling coalition, rarely run into trouble," said Pearson. "But online journals and other ‘new media' that are critical of the government are easy targets for censorship."

Human Rights Watch also expressed concern with the refusal of the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), the dominant party in the ruling coalition, to grant six members of the "new media," including Malaysiakini and the Malaysian Insider, access to its annual meeting on March 24-28, 2009.

An UMNO official cited their "unfriendly" reporting as the reason. The meeting is of particular importance this year as UMNO will be choosing a new leader. With the current leader, Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, stepping down, the new UMNO leader will fulfill his unexpired term, which has another four years to run.

On September 12, 2008, in still another attack on a free press, police arrested Raja Petra Kamarudin, founder and editor of Malaysia Today, under the Internal Security Act, which allows for indefinite preventive detention without charge or trial.

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/09/12/malaysia-free-journalists-and-parliamentarian

He was accused of demeaning Islam. Although released on technical grounds, the government is appealing the decision. In a separate case, Raja Petra is on trial for sedition on the politically motivated charge of defaming a government leader.

"The Malaysian government needs to allow all voices to be heard," said Pearson. "Freedom of speech is a touchstone of a true democracy."

Your great Canadian e-Book Novel!

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post, "Why not help us write your great Canadian online novel!"

"King David and Indian Agent Murray and the Things they Didn't Inspire" should be the name of your new book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Anonymous:

Thank you for writing. What a great title! If it's selected perhaps you could write the introduction or maybe we could dedicate it to you.

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk

Which News Review?

News Review has left a new comment on your post, "Foxy Knoxy" guilty?"

Hope that this case would be resolved soon... Everyone is already screaming for justice as soon as possible...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear News Review:

Thank you for contacting us. What's your URL. We did a quick Google but couldn't find it.

Sincerely,

Clare L. Pieuk

"Foxy Knoxy" guilty or not readers - how say you?

Harry Rag has left a new comment on your post, "Foxy Knoxy" guilty?"

For anyone who is interested in the facts behind the media spin, and who cares to learn more about the victim of this terrible murder - Meredith Kercher - there is an excellent Discussion Board http://perugiamurderfile.freeforums.org/index.php as well as an interesting Blog http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php.

These online resources are not for profit. Anyone can read and/or participate and people from around the world do. They have followed this case since November 2007, and are in no way related to Amanda Knox. Nor are they her friends
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr. Rag:

We're such polite types here. Interesting name you've got. Thank you for your second e-mail. We're assuming the Discussion Board and Blog referenced are based in the United States.

The case has not received much if any national coverage in Canada. There was a piece a few months ago about an arrest but that's been about it. Therefore, we were only vaguely aware it was generating so much attention elsewhere. It's surprising a shows like CNN's Nancy Grace and Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees haven't picked it up. Those Italians sure seem to like their trials!

Than you for sending our readers the links.

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk

Jeez, nice eyelashes!

We'll trade you 10 Bernie Madoffs for a Larry Bird?

Bernie Madoff On A Baseball Card - Topps will issue trading cards featuring the 'world's biggest hoaxes, hoodwinks and bamboozles' this summer

By Yuval Rosenberg
March 27, 2009

Cards of shame

They're not your usual baseball cards. Topps Company will be issuing trading cards of confessed swindler Bernie Madoff as part of a series featuring the 'world's biggest hoaxes, hoodwinks and bamboozles,' due out early this summer. Here's a sampling.

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- "I'll trade you two Bernie Madoffs for a Derek Jeter and David Wright."

Baseball card collectors could soon be saying something along those lines as the Topps Company will be issuing a trading card of confessed swindler Bernard Madoff as part of a product due out early this summer.

The Topps 2009 Allen & Ginter release will include cards of some 260 baseball players along with cards of historic figures and "world champions" from realms outside baseball. This year's product, though, will also nod to Madoff's financial chicanery as part of a group of cards featuring the "world's biggest hoaxes, hoodwinks and bamboozles." Among the other do-badders in the subset are Charles Ponzi, The Runaway Bride, and Enron.

"These cards feature 20 perpetrators of some of the most notorious pranks, dubious claims, and outright frauds of the last 2 centuries," boasts a Topps sell-sheet for the collection.

That means collectors who open a pack of the cards at their local hobby shop could find Madoff right alongside notable sluggers like Alex Rodriguez or Albert Pujols. Packs of the cards will sell for $3 apiece at retailers including Target (TGT, Fortune 500) and Wal-Mart (WMT, Fortune 500). The odds of finding a Madoff will be one in 12 packs on average.

The hoaxes subset, originally inspired by the case of 1970's skyjacker D.B. Cooper, was in the works even before the Madoff scandal hit the headlines, according to Topps spokesman Clay Luraschi. Madoff, in fact, was a late addition to the checklist, Luraschi says. "Ironically, the economy takes a dive and all these characters start washing out, like Bernie Madoff. We thought, hey, if anyone should be in this set it should be him."

The Madoff card is not the only gimmick included in the set. Topps will again be issuing so-called DNA relics, cards featuring actual hairs of historical subjects including Napoleon, King George III, Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, Edgar Allen Poe, George Washington, Jefferson Davis, Geronimo, Abraham Lincoln and Beethoven. But the Madoff card is the one most directly linked to current headlines.

"I think it will add some interest to the hobby in terms of non-collectors, more mainstream people getting into it just because of those cards," says Chris Olds, editor of Beckett Baseball, a publication for collectors. "They try to touch on unusual things that people would latch onto -- stuff that's out of the ordinary, especially stuff you wouldn't expect to find in a pack of baseball cards."

Some collectors on one popular trading-card blog seemed less than eager to see Madoff captured on cardboard.

"I think if I pull a Bernie Madoff card it will be getting burned or shredded," one poster noted.

Another collector noted that Madoff isn't the first infamous criminal to be featured on a trading card.

"I was pretty appalled when I found out about the Bernie Madoff card too," that blogger wrote, "but they've had Jesse James and Jack the Ripper in previous sets so I guess Bernie is the designated scumbag criminal for this year's set."

"Foxy Knoxy" guilty?

Both Raffaele Sollecito (left) and Amanda Knox deny charges of murder and sexual assault

Murder Case Brings 'Foxy Knoxy' Infamy In Italy

Story Highlights

- Murder trial makes American student notorious in Italy

- Knox, 21, accused with former boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito

- Student Meredith Kercher found dead in house shared with Knox

- Italian media portrays Knox as seductive femme fatale

From Hada MessiaCNN Rome Bureau
ROME, Italy (CNN) -- The Italian media call her "Foxy Knoxy" and portray her as a "devil with an angel's face," and there are 11 Facebook pages dedicated to her, all in Italian.

Amanda Knox, 21, is an American college student from Seattle, Washington, who is on trial for murder in Perugia, Italy. The case has given Knox almost pop star status there.

She was voted the top woman in an online "person of the year" poll by an Italian TV channel in December, beating out Carla Bruni, the Italian-born French first lady.

Seven of the 11 Facebook pages champion her innocence; four seem convinced that Knox is pure evil. A sampling of comments: "No to Amanda. No to her superstardom" ... "She's a sociopath" ..."Everyone is not sure if she is guilty or not and that she will lead us to a new existential awareness. Please shout with me your anger. ... Let's say no. Let's say Knox."

Knox and former boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito, 24, are charged with murdering and sexually assaulting one of Knox's roommates, British exchange student Meredith Kercher, on November 1, 2007. They have pleaded not guilty.

Knox and Sollecito are due back in court today. The last time Knox appeared before the panel of eight judges, she wore a T-shirt quoting The Beatles: "All you need is love."

Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini alleges that Kercher, 21, was killed because she refused to participate in a drug-fueled sex game played by Knox, Sollecito, and a third man, Ivory Coast native Rudy Hermann Guede. In court papers, prosecutors stated that Sollecito held Kercher by her wrists while Knox poked at her with a knife and Guede sexually assaulted her.

The case is being tried in Perugia, a university town about 115 miles north of Rome that is better known for its chocolate than for its scandalous murder trials.

Don't Miss

Wtness undermines the alibi
Courtroom packed as trial starts

According to the prosecutor's office, Kercher had been in Italy for two months as part of a year-long course with Leeds University, where she was working toward a degree in European Studies. She shared a house with Knox, a University of Washington student in the same exchange program, and two Italian housemates.

The crime scene, which has become a tourist attraction, has been broken into twice, police say.

Knox and Sollecito were arrested November 6, 2007, and were kept in prison while an investigation continued. The judge overseeing the investigation found both were capable of committing the crime again, fleeing the country or tampering with the evidence.

Police sought charges in July 2008, and they were ordered to trial in October. The trial began January 16 and has been held mostly on weekends.

Italian newspapers assigned their top crime reporters, and the case has received unprecedented international coverage. Knox has appeared on the cover of People magazine, which shares a corporate parent with CNN.

A random sampling of women on the streets of Rome showed that all of them had heard of the case and most believed Knox and Sollecito were at the very least implicated in the slaying.

The superheated publicity surrounding the case helped make Knox a household name in Italy. She is usually portrayed as a femme fatale. Consider these headlines:

• "Sex, lies and stabbings"
• "Lovers without any inhibitions"
• "And in prison, she even tries to sun tan"

Italian journalists also have plastered their newspapers with photos they found of Knox on the Internet, especially images that showed her as a "wild girl." They pounced on the "Foxy Knoxy" they found on her MySpace page, even though her parents later explained the high school moniker came from the way Knox played soccer, quick like a fox.

Although Italian law limits the publication of court and police records, the media ban is less strict than in many European countries. While it is not exactly legal to publish police investigative reports, no journalist has gone to jail in Italy for doing it.

Among the items leaked: Knox's diary, various police interrogations, photos of Kercher's body, video of Kercher's body (which wound up on YouTube but has been pulled), and video of the Italian forensic police carrying out their investigation. Eventually, even the leaks made headlines, leading to more speculation.

Knox can do no right in the Italian media. If she appears reserved and timid in court, she is portrayed as someone with plenty to hide. If she smiles or laughs in court, she's called disrespectful. As far as the Italian media is concerned, Knox is the mastermind who manipulated those around her and seduced her Italian boyfriend and led him astray.

While Knox and Sollecito's preliminary hearings were being held in October, Guede was convicted of murder after a fast-track trial. His lawyers had hoped that the speedy resolution of the case would give him a break at sentencing. He got 30 years in prison.

According to testimony at Guede's trial, his fingerprints were found in the house, and his DNA was linked to Kercher's body. He has never denied being in the house the night of the slaying but insists he didn't kill her. He says he had an "appointment" with her that night and was in the bathroom when she was killed.

Sollecito and Knox say they weren't at the house the night of the slaying. They say they both were at Sollecito's house. But the alibi has been contradicted by witnesses at the trial.

Eighty-six media outlets sent 140 journalists to cover the opening of the trial in January, but publicity has waned since then. The Italian 24-hour news channel TG24 no longer breaks into its programming with multiple updates. Knox, for now, has been relegated to the pages preceding the sports or weather report.

But Italians love their murder cases, and attention has shifted to other crime news. A mother is accused of killing her toddler son, a husband and wife are accused of multiple killings. Their courtrooms are now filled with spectators who wait in line an hour or more.

The Perugia courtroom still is packed, but the long line is gone. That is likely to change, however, as testimony draws to a close next month.

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury ....."

Good Day Readers:

We've often wondered what it would be like being a juror? Talked with a gentleman recently who had drawn a murder trial and wasn't looking forward to the experience - had too many other projects on the go. However, unless you can come up with an ironclad excuse it's pretty hard to avoid doing your civic duty. Besides, the daily remuneration is not very good. At the last moment the Defendant pled guilty problem solved.

With our luck we'd be selected for a lengthy multiple homicide trial where the jury was sequestered. From the article below the experience doesn't sound all that great

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jurors Risk Post-Trial Trauma, Study Finds

ZOSIA BIELSKI
Globe and Mail
March 27, 2009

Plucked from their day-to-day, they face distressed victims, review grisly evidence and are then tasked with agreeing on a defendant's fate. Later, thanks to contempt laws, they are barred from speaking to family, friends or even therapists about their disturbing experiences.

Jurors are primed for trauma and need more social and psychological support, says a new report from psychologists at the University of Leicester.

"We simply don't know enough about what goes on within the jury room," said Noelle Robertson, a senior lecturer in clinical psychology who co-authored the study, which was published in The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice last month.

The study revealed that for the more vulnerable candidates, jury duty can lead to severe stress or post-traumatic stress disorder - or what the researchers refer to as "vicarious traumatisation."

Most recently in the high-profile case of Josef Fritzl, jurors were shown Elisabeth Fritzl's graphic video testimony in short segments. In the Paul Bernardo case, Justice Patrick LeSage spoke openly about waking up at night in the months and years afterward - Canadian law prohibited Mr. Bernardo's jurors from sharing their experiences.

The study, which also references earlier studies from Canada, the United States and New Zealand, was conducted in 2007 on 68 British jurors.

The respondents filled out an online survey that included questions about their own personal histories of trials and trauma. It offered a "trauma symptoms checklist" about headaches, insomnia or weight loss experienced during and after the trial. Another scale asked jurors to rate 44 different aspects of jury service, including disturbing evidence and jury deliberation and decision time.

Some 23 per cent of the jurors reported dealing with traumatic events in the course of their trial; 5 per cent reported that they had responded with "intense fear, helplessness or horror." One juror was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder.

Jury duty proved especially damaging for women, who were also more adversely affected by dissension and questioning in the jury room. Most respondents found deliberation more stressful than visually gruesome evidence, especially when jurors felt pressure from others to change their verdict.

That finding doesn't surprise James Morton, a Toronto lawyer who teaches classes about evidence at Osgoode Hall.

"One hears rumours of nasty arguments, occasionally even leading to physical confrontations in the jury room. People take very different positions and they are mandated to come to a unanimous decision in the criminal cases. ... You can imagine there'd be intimidation, pressure and 'gosh, we all want to go home Friday and be done with it.' "

Unlike American jurors, Canadian and British jurors are sworn to secrecy both during and after the trial. And unlike jurors in the U.S., they are often not sequestered, which means they must travel home nightly with their experiences.

Although Mr. Morton believes the Canadian system works, he admits that Canadian jurors "are not treated perhaps as well as they should be."

"You're taken out of your ordinary life and put into a highly stressful difficult situation .... They get a trivial amount of money on a daily basis and they're herded into rather uncomfortable, beat-up waiting rooms. It's not a pleasant process."

The British study recommends more preparation for jurors and suggests making supporters - similar to the ones available for vulnerable witnesses - available to jurors to lessen the isolation they may experience.

"If we think about models of trauma, then the fact that you can't disclose material to [someone] who may be sympathetic and is able to engage in something that might [provide] catharsis, is difficult," Dr. Robertson said.

The study also calls for a questionnaire that would save jurors the trauma of cases that might resonate with their own past experiences.

In Canada, jurors get very little probing on their background. Mr. Morton pointed out that a juror who can't bring himself or herself themselves to look at the evidence and derails the trial is far costlier than a questionnaire.

Dr. Robertson, the study's co-author, said jury selection is "an evolving domain," but added: "There's a great deal of inertia in the system, and a resistance to change: 'Well it's worked for hundreds of years? Why should we alter it?'

"But of course we've become increasingly aware of sensitivities and we know a hell of a lot of more about human processes and behaviours."

Why not help us write your great Canadian online novel?

Good Day Readers:

The article below has finally driven us to go public with an idea we've been noodling for some time - laugh as you will, write a book online with your help. Why not? The idea would be to share our experience as a Blogger being sued for alleged defamation by a multi-million dollar taxpayer financed corporation, the Manitoba Metis Federation, by one of its pit bull lawyers. Of course, we'd need an attorney to review the final transcript.

We'd begin by suggesting possible topics for the chapters then ask for your feedback. The process of cobbling together your suggestions, while keeping you regularly apprised as the project took shape, would fall upon us. In effect, each of you would become mini co-authors.

Who needs a major publishing house? Once completed anyone could pay a nominal, fee (say $5), to see the completed transcript. Part of the money raised could be donated to Metis charities throughout Manitobe of your choosing. Some to upgrading this site so we're able to keep you better informed. Regardless, there'd be a complete public accounting of all funds raised so you'd know exactly how every penny was being spent.

Of course, we'd need your help in coming up with a title for the book. Surely you could suggest a better title than Sheila Jones Morrison's 1995, Rotten to the core: the politics of the Manitoba Metis Federation.
How say you readers?

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Content You Pay For – What A Concept
IVOR TOSSELL
Globe and Mail
March 26, 2009

While the rest of the world consummates its hysteria over Twitter, the smart people at Google are working on the next big Web trend. That's right: Books!

Books, which are substantially longer than 140 characters and yet inexplicably continue to appeal to people, are starting to take off in digital form. Electronic book readers are shifting from novelty item to household item; touch-screen smartphones have already gone from trendy to ubiquitous.

And Google is placing itself squarely in the middle of the fray – not so much as a nebulous information provider, but as a reseller of literary products. Faddish free sites such as Twitter might still be hopping, but this could represent a sea change online.

Right now, Google is on the cusp of a mind-blowing fait accompli. Several years ago, it started digitizing books – millions and millions of them. Using special scanners, it started dumping the contents of entire libraries into digital databases that could be searched and sorted on the Web.

The copyright-holders were nonplussed by these developments. They sued. The case dragged on for three years, until, earlier this year, they settled for $125-million (U.S.). Critically, though, the settlement didn't force Google to stop doing what it was doing. Quite the opposite: Not only does the settlement let Google keep on scanning books, it allows the company (with conditions) to sell access to all manner of books – in-copyright, out-of-copyright, in-print, out-of-print, dead author, drunk author, you name it.

Different types of books will be handled differently. Non-copyrighted books will be freely available – as, indeed, they already are. For books that are still copyrighted, readers – and only American readers, at first – will be shown previews and given the option of purchasing access to the entire electronic edition, which they can read online or download to mobile devices such as iPhones. (If the books are still in print in the United States, authors need to opt into the program; otherwise, books are fair game.)

American universities and libraries, meanwhile, will be able to buy full access to the Google Books cache; as with all revenues, Google will split the income with publishers and authors.
What a change from the Web we know. Google's rise came with what we once called “Web 2.0,” a business model that was always more ideology than dollars and cents. Web 2.0 was about acquiring a great gob of startup money, giving away the service and content for free, and then making money by selling ads. To prop up this model, thinkers pushed compatible ideas like the promise of voluntarily created content and the inerrant wisdom of the masses.

But Web 2.0 and books never really got along. They're hard to crowdsource (and yes, people have tried), and they take time (and thus money) to produce. While it's true that this settlement does allow Google to run ads on top of its pages, what we're looking at here isn't, at the heart of things, yet another online effort to post free content and pay for it with ads. No, Google is using a somewhat older business model: offering a product, and asking people to pay for it. That marks one sensible retreat from the free-for-all world of tomorrow we've been promised all these years.

Even more interesting will be to see whether the second tenet of 21st-century groupthink will hold up – the Long Tail, which postulates that companies can make piles of money by selling a few copies of many back-catalogue products, rather then a whole lot of one blockbuster product.

It will be a fascinating test case: On one hand, Google is assembling a mightily long tail's worth of materials. And Google is perfectly positioned to sell them. On the other hand, the book industry is as blockbuster-driven as any other. A handful of heavily promoted books make up the bulk of book sales. It's all well and good to become attached to your favourite 19th-century American poet, but tell that to Harry Potter.

If I'm skeptical about the extent to which consumers will embrace this embarrassment of riches, it's because while Google Book Search is about to reinvent itself, it isn't actually new at all. For years, the service has been lurking, just off the Google home page. In fact, millions of out-of-copyright books are already online. (Indeed, Google's hardly the first to arrive. An organization called Project Gutenberg has put 28,000 text-only editions of old books online since 1971.). Yet what seems like a fantastic resource has so far been a somewhat marginal presence on the Web.

The relaunched Google Book Search will make a splash, one way or the other. But while the Google folks are sounding the same utopian notes about access to information, we're not in the land of Web 2.0 any more. With books, Google seems to have abandoned its quest to digitize reality and sell ads on it, in favour of a business plan that makes much more sense: Digitize reality, and sell it back to us. Now, that's progress.