So, Italian judges have discretion to shorten statutes of limitation —
and used it on behalf of Prime Minister Berlusconi (who just happens to be
the richest man in the country). Thank you, dear grandparents, for taking the
boat to the New World. (NYT article, “All Corruption Charges Against Berlusconi
Are Dismissed,” Dec. 11, 2004)
payment of more than $300,000–which Fininvest insists was a ‘consulting
fee’ but which magistrates consider a bribe” for his part in having the so-
called Mammi Law enacted favoring Berlusoni’s media empire. (The Nation,
“politically incorrect” in Italian.
On the other hand, did you hear that 16-year-old Steve Geluso flunked his Language Arts class 
at Richland High? Asked to “Write a three-part compare/contrast essay that explores the similarities
and/or differences between two items on any topic,” Steve choose to distinguish between piracy and
stealing. His teacher deemed the essay (transcribed here) to be “Really splitting hairs on reasoning why
and many more. As in Election 2004, nuance is apparently a vice, not a virtue.
Need a gift idea for a particularly nervous and anxious friend? Why not Fredd Culbertson’s Phobic List
poster? The list is fun and entertaining. For instance, here are the first handful of items under Letter B:
FEAR of:
Bacteria– Bacteriophobia.
Bald people– Peladophobia.
Bald, becoming– Phalacrophobia.
Bathing– Ablutophobia.
Beards– Pogonophobia.
Beaten by a rod or instrument of punishment, or of being severely criticized- Rhabdophobia.
Beautiful women– Caligynephobia.
Beds or going to bed- Clinophobia.
Chamber of Commerce. Perhaps, in addition to Evan’s call for a frontpage disclosure of the ownership,
the rag could change its name to the Madison County Chamber Pot.
wintry weather
the meaning of “parent”
sinks in
ISSA, translated by David G. Lanoue
other parents from listening in when the child’s welfare needs to be protected. The ACLU’s lawyer, Douglas
Klunder, says “I don’t think the state should be in the position of encouraging parents to act surreptitiously
and eavesdrop on their children.” [That reminds me of the “children’s rights” extremists who argued a decade
ago that NYS lawyers appointed to represent children must solely advocate the position desired by any
child able to “express” a position (e.g., in a custody or abuse cases).] There is a lot of room between the state
“encouraging” more parental eavesdropping and the state declaring it a criminal invasion of privacy.
full size photo & haiku
The other 
I think that a lot of people missed the issue in here. Instead, they are just repeating press releases from the loser. Anyone who claims that this case means that listening to your childrens’ phone calls is unconstitutional did not read the case.
The facts are the mother surreptitiously listened to a conversation between her daughter and a third party. The mother provided her notes from this conversation to the police, and the materia was used at the third party’s trial. The third party argued that his rights were violated, because he talked to someone (the daughter) without the daughter or him knowing that he was being listened to. The daughter was not a party to this matter and as far as the record reflects she was not suing the mother. Washington state, like many states, provides individuals with protection from interception of telephone calls. While an argument could be made that the daughter had less of an expectation of privacy, to assert that any time someone happens to call someone who turns out to live with their parents has a less degree of statutorily-recognized privacy effectively destroys the any effect of the statute.
The court was right.
Comment by Anonymous — December 13, 2004 @ 12:18 pm
I think that a lot of people missed the issue in here. Instead, they are just repeating press releases from the loser. Anyone who claims that this case means that listening to your childrens’ phone calls is unconstitutional did not read the case.
The facts are the mother surreptitiously listened to a conversation between her daughter and a third party. The mother provided her notes from this conversation to the police, and the materia was used at the third party’s trial. The third party argued that his rights were violated, because he talked to someone (the daughter) without the daughter or him knowing that he was being listened to. The daughter was not a party to this matter and as far as the record reflects she was not suing the mother. Washington state, like many states, provides individuals with protection from interception of telephone calls. While an argument could be made that the daughter had less of an expectation of privacy, to assert that any time someone happens to call someone who turns out to live with their parents has a less degree of statutorily-recognized privacy effectively destroys the any effect of the statute.
The court was right.
Comment by Anonymous — December 13, 2004 @ 12:18 pm
Dear a@a, the Court specifically found that the Mother violated the State’s privacy act (a crime) by listening in on the daughter’s conversation — the identity of the other party was not relevant to that finding. If a parent were instead found to have the right to monitor a minor child’s phone calls, the caller would not have an expectation of privacy when calling a minor at the home of the minor’s parent or guardian. That’s my legal interpretation. Given the Court’s definitive interpretation of the law, I believe the law should be changed.
Comment by David Giacalone — December 13, 2004 @ 12:44 pm
Dear a@a, the Court specifically found that the Mother violated the State’s privacy act (a crime) by listening in on the daughter’s conversation — the identity of the other party was not relevant to that finding. If a parent were instead found to have the right to monitor a minor child’s phone calls, the caller would not have an expectation of privacy when calling a minor at the home of the minor’s parent or guardian. That’s my legal interpretation. Given the Court’s definitive interpretation of the law, I believe the law should be changed.
Comment by David Giacalone — December 13, 2004 @ 12:44 pm
good page http://www.g888.com
Comment by mishel — August 25, 2005 @ 9:48 am
good page http://www.g888.com
Comment by mishel — August 25, 2005 @ 9:48 am