Busted

When I arrived at work today the head of the finance division came into my cubicle and asked if I had time for a chat.

He pulled up a chair, and said "Now this hasn't really gotten out yet but on Friday we got a letter about you..."

When he first starts talking I think "Oh no someone's got cancer" then he keeps talking and I think "Oh crap, I'm totally busted for something". And my heart starts beating and I get nervous till he finishes his sentence:

"...from Centrelink. They want to know your employment details."

He's very serious, and I'm wondering why he's so serious. I wonder if I'm going to jail or something. Then I remember that Centrelink sent me a letter a while ago asking me for my employment details. I had already given them my new employment details but not the ABN number of my new work. I had ignored the letter on the advice of the Centrelink worker who told me that because of the way I'm paid in my full time employment I would be receiving $12 a fortnight from Centrelink forever, unless I stopped handing in their forms. So I stopped handing in my forms. My multiple attempts at breaking up with them face-to-face handn't worked. I decided to screen their calls and not return their mail. It's healthier this way.

This ignoring worked enough to get a letter in the mail from Centrelink telling me my Newstart is cancelled (win!) but not enough for them to not think I'm up to dodgy business and send letters to my employer (fail).

"Apparently someone over there thinks you're ripping them off" he continued.

He was sufficiently worried by the letter to meet with me as if I'm in trouble with the law. I find it amusing that Centrelink think I'm ripping them off because I'm ignoring them so they'll stop giving me money. Maybe they'll fine me for trying to stop getting money from them. It wouldn't surprise me.

Anyway, I'll call them tomorrow to tell them what I've been trying to tell them all along, I'm in a new relationship, could they please move on, I have.

SF DA DISMISSES 445 DRUG CASES IN POLICE LAB SCANDAL—1,500 MORE CASES FACING DISMISSAL

San Francisco
March 29, 2010
By Blogonaut

The San Francisco Police Department is in the midst of a colossal drug lab scandal that threatens to cause the dismissal of as many as 1,900 drug cases, and the investigation against SFPD criminalist Deborah Madden—whose tested cocaine samples are “missing” weight—as widened to implicate several more crime lab employees.

No drug lab employees, including Madden, have yet been arrested.

We became aware of the story today when a friend late for jury duty was told not to bother—the case had been dismissed.

That case, against accused cocaine dealer Mario Bell, precipitated the dismissal of at least 45 more drug cases last Friday (including Bell’s), after his attorney, James Senal, asked Judge Anne-Christine Massullo earlier this week to release the internal police investigation into Madden—who is suspected of taking small amounts from cocaine samples she processed for testing.

The judge ordered the release of the 1,000 page internal affairs report last Tuesday to Bell’s attorney, but gave the District Attorney’s Office until last Friday to review the report. After doing so, and determining that other criminalists in addition to Madden were implicated, the DA dismissed 45 additional cases including Bell’s.

Bell was charged with three separate cocaine sales transactions, but the evidence from only one of the sales was tested by Madden.

According to the San Francisco Examiner, the San Francisco District Attorneys Office is considering the dismissal of 750 additional pending drug cases.

In addition to the 445 pending cases already dismissed because of the scandal and the 750 cases reported by the Examiner that are facing dismissal, an unknown quantity of defendants arrested for drug offenses who have not even been charged never will be.

Meanwhile, the number of drug cases that the District Attorney’s Office estimates may be dismissed grows by the day. USA Today reported today—March 29, 2010—that the number of cases facing dismissal or that have been dismissed has grown to 1,900 cases total—a staggering number.

Read more: Drug lab scandal jeopardizes hundreds of cases (SF Chron.)

Anti-Christ Revealed!

I didn't know but it seems the anti-Christ is among us. The end times are here!

Like a Lion

There's a song on the new Passion worship album by the Dave Crowder Band called Like a Lion. And the chorus says:

My God's not dead
he's surely alive
and he's living on the inside
roaring like a lion

It's meant to be rousing and inspiring. But I don't find it inspiring at all. I get this picture of God being a tiny, little lion living in me, roaring. And a lion who is small enough to live inside me is about as scary as a puppy of similar dimensions.

Of course I understand it's a simile. But still.

I guess assuring everyone that God's not dead he lives inside doesn't seem all that inspiring to me. I want a God who is outside. Of course I believe that God does live inside me, but not just there. Jesus is also reigning in heaven. And God is still bigger than the universe and holding it all together. His decision to take residency inside me is only a part of his living arrangements, which I find inspiring because of his humble desire to live inside me. But to me the song sounds like it's where he's been banished like Voldemort onto the back of Professor Quirrell's head. That doesn't do it for me.

"Raarrrr!"

Siganme Las Buenas

I'm doing the sex talk at Soul Survivor in April. Except that I'm doing it pitched at teenagers, and it's going to be about three times as long.

Anyway, seeing as I'm a seminar speaker I had to submit a profile for the program. I hate writing those things. It's so hard to be interesting, and funny and say a little about yourself that people might be interested to know. In the end I gave up and just wrote mostly silly stuff. This is what I wrote:

Tom spends his days working in schools around Sydney telling young people about Jesus. He spends his nights wearing a cape and fighting petty crime. He is passionate about Jesus, movies and looking at photos of himself on Facebook. He has no pets, children or wives, nor does he love coffee.

I'm worried a) that I sound like an idiot, and b) that the last line will look like I'm lonely and letting all the ladies know I'm available, rather than a dig at seemingly every youth speaker's profile that I've read.

Still if the "Desperate-and-just-putting-it-out-there" look works, I won't be complaining.

17 Again

I just watched 17 Again and I can see why teenage girls think Zac Efron is hot. And besides his looks, he can dance and is good at basket ball.

It's a pitty his acting skills are a little lacking.

All in a Day's Work

It's been an interesting few days at work.

Yesterday I visited a lunchtime Christian group in a primary school. I was one of the guest panellists in their hard questions/Bible quiz show, along with three other males on staff at the school.

For one of the challenges, in between answering tricky questions about the Bible, I was made to play Evangelism Twister. Which is pretty much twister on a world map ("Left foot Asia!"). This meant that on this stinking hot day, where I was sweating like a pocari, I had to get down on the floor and get to know these three other male teachers, very intimately, (kinda like this). "Hello!"

Today I was speaking at a boys school and thought, because I was speaking to boys in years 3-6, I would would start my Bible talk with an illustration about being a ninja. I took my ninja sword along and the boys were quite excited. It's understandable because swords are awesome.

Following my talk the Chaplain decided to call me Ninja Tom which stuck. I spent the rest of the day at school having boys call out "Hi Ninja Tom!" which was rather good for my ego.

At their lunch time group for one of the games they stuck a target on me and got the boys to just peg balls at me. I just had to sit in a chair and take it. I had a teacher next to me whose job it was to protect me but he just chucked the balls at me too. Seeing as I was Ninja Tom the boys seemed to relish the opportunity to assault a ninja.

It's a good thing I like my job.

LA APPEALS COURT RECEPTIVE TO POLANSKI’S RENEWED DISMISSAL BID

******BREAKING NEWS*******

As we reported in some detail here and here, during the last days of 2009 a Los Angeles appellate panel strongly encouraged LA Superior Court judge Peter Espinoza to allow Roman Polanski—on the lam since a (now deceased) judge and Los Angeles prosecutors violated ethics rules (and the director’s plea-bargain) by conferring in secret, then revealing an intention to double-cross and ambush Polanski at the sentencing hearing (leading the director after he got wind of this to flee to his native France)—to consent to sentencing “in absentia” so Espinoza’s reasons for refusing hear evidence of judicial and prosecutorial corruption would go away.

But when his bluff was called, Judge Espinoza essentially said “hell no” to the court of appeals by flatly rejecting Polanski’s motion to be sentenced “in absentia” as the appellate court recommended.

Following Judge Espinoza’s nose thumb at his own supervising court of appeal, the Swiss authorities who are being asked to extradite the French director into Espinoza’s appellate court defiant, pro-prosecution embrace, balked—placing Polanski’s extradition on indefinite hold.

Polanski’s latest attempt to break that log jam—with the continued support of his now 46 year old “victim”—is his March 18, 2010 court of appeal petition to dismiss the 33 year old statutory rape charge based on new evidence of judicial an prosecutor corruption—or at least to unseal the secret evidence of that corruption and allow Polanski’s attorneys to provide that evidence to Swiss authorities now being asked to return the director to face the same corrupted, 30 year old court case.

A frustrated Los Angeles appeals court apparently agrees that Polanski’s latest allegations have potential merit, because they have taken the rare step of ordering Los Angeles prosecutors to file a written explanation of why the director’s latest court of appeal peitition to dismiss should not be granted:

“The court has read and considered the petition for writ of mandate filed herein March 18, 2010. The People are requested to serve and file opposition, on or before March 30, 2010.”

And so the plot thickens—stay tuned…..

Sex, Sex, Sex That's All You Ever Think About

It's the end of a long week.

I've still got sex on the brain.

I preached on it tonight and it felt really long with out many jokes. I think I might have been the first person in my church to ever say in a sermon "Giddy-up, giddy-up, giddy-up, babe."

Even though it felt long, I wanted to preach on the topic for a good three hours. I feel like we don't regularly teach a good Biblical theology of sex in the church.

I reckon these days I have a higher view of sex and marriage than I ever have. The more single I am the more I appreciate what it means for people to be together. And it doesn't make me jealous, nor does it make me feel lonely. I guess I feel excited that I have friends who get to get married, and have sex, and have kids, and participate in this great gift of God.

I wonder, as I have before, if this is because I am so unmarried and unsexed, that I can idealise it from a far. Maybe that's my role at the moment. Everyone else can do the hard work of marriage, and I can to the easy work of telling everyone how good it is.

On the other hand, I never have married people telling me how good singleness is. Perhaps they should. Then again, most people don't covet singleness like a lot of people covet being in a relationship. Perhaps the only people who covet singleness are the ones who are too righteous to covet having an affair, getting a new partner or doing friends with benefits, but too unhappy to enjoy their current relationship.

Maybe I could do a survey.

Or maybe I could go to bed.

I'll pick the latter.

NEW POLANSKI APPEAL REVEALS MORE OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT BY JUDGE, DA’S

******BREAKING NEWS*****

March 18, 2010

By Blogonaut

As we reported in the last days of 2009 here, on December 21, 2009, the California Court of Appeal in Los Angeles issued an opinion in response to fugitive and award winning director Roman Polanski’s request to dismiss the decades old statutory rape case against him, but strongly suggesting that prosecutors cut a deal with Polanski—or that the Lost Angeles Superior Court at least consider allowing the director to be sentenced without having to return to a Los Angeles court room so that procedurally the Superior Court could then look into and act on Polanski’s motion to dismiss for alleged serious misconduct by the now dead trial judge and several prosecutors.

Despite this firm “advice” by the California appeals court, earlier this year Judge Peter P. Espinoza of Los Angeles Superior Court has stubbornly refused requests by Mr. Polanski’s lawyers to dismiss his case or sentence him in absentia or to review claims of official misconduct in the prosecution.

Polanski was arrested in Switzerland last year when the director left his primary home in France (who has refused to extradite Polanski) to attend an award ceremony.

While Los Angeles prosecutors’ request to extradite Polanski back to a Los Angeles courtroom dragged on, Polanski has been released from a Swiss jail to remain under house arrest in his fabulous villa in uber luxurious Gstaad.

The Swiss had earlier announced that a decision on Polanski’s fate could be handed down any time, but after Judge Espinoza refused to implement any of the suggestion ways in which the matter might be resolved short of the director’s waiver of extradition, in February of this year the Swiss then announced that they were putting the matter on indefinite hold until the courts of appeal in California had a definitive ruling on whether the director could be sentenced without returning to the U.S.

The other shoe dropped today with a new Los Angeles appeals court filing by Polanski that brought with it disclosure of sealed testimony about secret dealings between high-ranking prosecutors and a now deceased judge in the director’s three decades old statutory rape plea.

According to today’s story in the New York Times:

“The 68-page petition asks the California Court of Appeals for the Second District, in Los Angeles, to act on an emergency basis. It argues, among other things, that the court should free Mr. Polanski by imposing a sentence for time served, or at least make the sealed testimony alleging wrongdoing available to Swiss authorities.”

Polanski’s allegations of wrongdoing involve highly improper contacts between the (now deceased) trial judge and two high ranking prosecutors with the Los Angeles County District Attorneys Office, who have been identified as Stephen S. Trott, who was the chief deputy of the Los Angeles district attorney’s office, and Michael J. Montagna, a supervising deputy, according to testimony described in the petition and detailed in the Times story.

“One or both of the prosecutors met in the summer of 1977 with Judge Rittenband, who is now deceased, after [Roger Gunson, a deputy district attorney who prosecuted Mr. Polanski after his 1977 arrest] told them he intended to file an application to disqualify the judge because of misconduct, according to the petition’s account. The pair later told Mr. Gunson that the judge had “admitted all of the alleged misconduct,” according to the petition, but they denied Mr. Gunson permission to file the disqualification motion”, the times reports.

The appeals writ application today by lawyers for Polanski, described a series of sworn interviews in February and March during which Gunson described his severe misgivings about the conduct of the case, the Times reports.

Montagna told the Times he denies any improper contacts Gunson refused to comment, and Trott, who is now a senior federal appeals judge, declined comment.

In the meantime Polanski’s alleged victim in the case who is now an adult woman in her 40’s is adamant that the director has been punished enough and her attorney has joined in Polanski’s prior requests for a dismissal of the 33 year old charges.

Losing Soul

Seeing as I'm preaching about sex on Sunday, I've been thinking about it for a few weeks now. Of course, if you go by the "statistics" men think about sex every 5 seconds, so nothing's changed really.

I'm reading Every Young Woman's Battle because I'm trying to understand the issues of a single Christian woman. Actually I'd like to understand the issues for women in general, but I figure that's too broad, so I'm just going with the single Christian ones. If there are any women who wants to tell me what it's like being a woman, feel free. I've never been one as far as I know.

Anyway, there was one line at the beginning of Every Young Woman's Battle which said about some promiscuous boys "Each time they had sex with a girl, they took a piece of her soul." This worried me. While I understand what the writer is saying, I'm uncomfortable with saying that girls who have sex lose their soul. I think what the writer is saying that having sex outside of marriage does real spiritual damage, which I'm quite happy to agree with. But if a girl having sex outside of marriage loses some of her soul at some point she'll have no soul, which is almost like saying she's lost her humanity. It seems to imply that somehow a girl who has had sex is less valuable than the girl who hasn't.

Of course I know this isn't what the writer is saying. The gist of the book is "You're too valuable to be giving yourself away to people who aren't going to be committed for a lifetime." But it's the language that worries me. Probably because I think it reflects how Christians often talk about sex outside of marriage. We seem to say that sex cheapens a girl. While we should be saying that we can cheapen the act of sex, but we can't cheapen the person.

The other issue I have is that the language seems to be used much more often in conjunction with women. So the girl who has sex a lot loses her soul and cheapens herself. The guy who has sex a lot is expressing his masculinity in an unhealthy and selfish way. If I had to choose I'd rather be the person who expresses my nature wrong, than person who loses their nature.

Isn't it just as true of girls as it is for guys? A girl who has sex outside of marriage expresses her feminine sexuality, her desire for love, intimacy and pleasure in a way that is in essence unhealthy and selfish. The issue is not that she becomes less, but that sex should be so much more.

Anyway, I could say a whole lot more on the issue of sex at the moment. But I have to save up the gold for Sunday. That's just something I've been thinking about.

Photo by Cazpoo - I'm not sure why I picked the photo. I thought it was less obvious than a flower I guess.

On the Fly

I turned up at a school today prepared to do three different talks. Jesus feeding the 5000 at Chapel for years 3-4 and Chapel for years 5-12 and Jesus and the Woman at the Well for the lunch time group. Unfortunately the Chaplain has been terribly busy and forgot that I would be preparing something for the 3-4 Chapel and had prepared a chapel on the 2nd Commandment. So he asked if I could do something on that. I had a period to write a talk.

I thought I should be able to do it because God provides. However when I sat down in the Chaplain's office to write the talk I was visited to by to friendly boys who I had met two weeks ago who were keen for a chat. Far be it from me to ignore two teenaged visitors, so my talk writing time was reduced to the few pauses in conversations when I could stare out the window and think and on the walk to the Chapel with the Assistant Chaplain.

Needless to say it wasn't the greatest talk I've done. But for a few minutes work, I was pretty pleased with it. God provided. We learnt that Coca-Cola won't answer your prayers.

Ladies

I was speaking at a school the other day and I was talking about Jews and Samaritans. I said "Jews and Samaritans, they didn't like each other. They didn't associate with each other at all. Just like vampires don't associate with werewolves. That one's for you, ladies."

And then instantly I regretted adding the "ladies" on the end. Because saying "ladies" makes you sound seedy. Especially when you're talking to a bunch of school kids. 27 year-old men shouldn't call school girls "ladies". I had even planned not to say it, to say "girls", or "that's for all you females". But it was "ladies" that came out.

When I came home and Brendan, the flatmate (he is very flat), told me about this piece by Demetri Martin and then I felt like even more of a creep...ladies.

SPECTOR APPEAL: TRIAL JUDGE IMPROPERLY TESTIFIED ON VIDEO TAPE

Phil Spector trial judge Larry Fidler

Constitutional prohibition on trial judge giving testimony threatens to derail conviction

By Blogonaut

March 11, 2010


Phillip Spector’s Opening Brief on Appeal (“AOB”) contains a very surprising issue, and one that if found by the court of appeal to be error is almost certain to result in a reversal and remand for a new trial. Here is the story:

At the first trial the prosecution’s criminalist Lynn Herold testified (and later reiterated in a December, 2008 statement) that after 6 years of investigation, the physical evidence could not exclude the possibility that Lana Clarkson committed suicide.

But by the time the state criminalist testified in trial #2 she had dramatically changed that opinion, stating that blood spatter allegedly noted by rookie evidence technician Jamie Lintemoot on the back of Clarkson’s hand—“evidence” that the criminalist was allegedly unaware of until she testified in trial #2 and that Lintemoot never documented —persuaded the criminalist that suicide was impossible.

Understandably, defense counsel Doron Weinberg vigorously cross-examined Lintemoot on this alleged blood spatter evidence, because Lintemoot’s report was so vague on where the blood was seen on Clarkson’s hand that she was called into a meeting with the coroner (who did not see the blood) and criticized about the inadequate documentation.

To counter Weinberg’s implication based on his reading aloud from Lintemoot’s prior trial testimony (in trial #1) that the blood was not on the back of Clarkson’s hand at all, the prosecution was allowed to introduce a Court TV video tape of Lintemoot’s prior testimony pointing to areas on her hand where she claims to have seen blood on Clarkson’s hand.

Prosecutor Truc Do falsely represented to the court (and falsely told the jury during her part of the closing argument when the video was again shown to the jury several times) that the Lintemoot video taped testimony took place in front of the jury during trial #1, and therfore explaned the very prior testimony that Doron Weinberg had called into question by showing Lintemoot's clarifying gestures (allegedly) while giving that prior testimony.

But the prior testimony by Lintemoot was not part of the prior trial evidence at all, instead taking place out of the jury's presence during a hearing related to whether one of Spector’s lawyers in trial #1 could be compelled by the prosecution to testify that she saw Dr. Henry Lee remove an object from the crime scene during a defense visit. In other words, Lintemoot's gestures on the video tape did not explain the prior testimony that Weinberg read from at all. The video tape was made at an entirely different hearing.

But the error is far worse than prosecutor Truc Do's misrepresentation of when the testimony was given (and therefore whether the video tape was even relevant).

Trial Judge Larry Fidler is depicted in the video tape as well, describing for the record the areas on Lintemoot’s hand where Judge Fidler claimed he saw Lintemoot pointing to while on the witness stand to show where the blood was on Clarkson’s hand (which only the judge could see clearly at the hearing).

In other words, the video tape showed the very judge who was presiding over the retrial trial giving what amounted to video taped testimony about where on Clarkson’s hand Lintemoot claimed during the first trial to have seen blood splatter—blood spatter that was never seen by anyone else and that was not described as to precise location in Lintemoot’s report.

Blood spatter that was so crucial to the case it caused the state’s criminalist Lynn Herold to change her testimony during the first trial from “suicide cannot be ruled out” to suicide is “impossible”.

In addition, prosecutor Truc Do admitted during her closing argument in trial #2 that Lintemoot’s testimony regarding blood spatter evidence was the most important in the case, stating that this “…this was the single piece of evidence that [the defense] cannot explain away. It is absolutely [inconsistent] with Lana Clarkson holding the gun.”

All of this is very problematic for the prosecution because as a matter of federal constitutional law (as well as California statute) a trial judge may not testify to the jury in the very matter that he is presiding over.

But the prosecution showed the video tape of Judge Fidler explaining exactly where he saw Lintemoot testify she saw blood spatter on Clarkson’s hands to the jury several times during its summation to bolster Lintemoot’s undocumented assertion during trial #2 that she saw blood on the back of Clarkson’s hands—which in turn was the sole foundation for criminalist Lynn Herold’s change in testimony in trial #2—for the first time testifying that suicide was impossible.

The bottom line?

If the court of appeal concludes that showing Spector’s retrial jury the video of Judge’s Fidler describing where on Clarkson’s hand Lintemoot allegedly saw blood spatter was the equivalent of Judge Fidler “testifying” in trial #2—and under the case law we do not see any way around that conclusion—then Spector’s conviction must be reversed unless the error was “harmless” as a matter of law.

But how can the error be harmless if prosecutor Truc Do has already told the jury during her summation that the location of the Lintemoot observed (but undocumented) blood splatter was the most important evidence in the case as well as “the single piece of evidence that [the defense] cannot explain away”?

And how can this error be harmless if Lintemoot’s undocumented testimony that she saw blood spatter on Clarkson’s had was the sole reason why the state’s criminalist changed her testimony, claiming for the first time in trial #2 that a Clarkson suicide could not have happened?

Stay tuned, as we intend over the coming days to highlight the other arguments on appeal Spector makes in his AOB.

However, we believe that this issue—standing alone—is sufficient to virtually guarantee Phil Spector a new trial.

Truc Life?

First and foremost, I'm sorry for the lack of posts. Only three posts in the month of February?...I'll blame it on the short month! In reality, I've just been busy with work. They have implemented these new "enhancements" which, to my understanding, are supposed to improve things but instead they have made my job a living hell. This is no different from the enhancements that Burke has brought to the Leafs this season. Did anybody really expect the Leafs to be this bad? Prior to the start of the season most experts, bloggers and hockey fans all over had them pegged as a team fighting for the playoffs instead of a team fighting to get out of the basement.

The biggest change Burke made to this year's edition of the Leafs were to inject them with truculence. Leafs bloggers latched on to this word harder than a hungry baby would to a tit and why wouldn't they? Burke won a Stanley Cup with a truculent team! To illustrate just how infatuated we were with truculence, some of us were excited over having Garnet Exelby as a third pairing defenceman because of videos like this.

Sporting a 21-33-12 record through 66 games, I think it's fair to ask the question "Is truculence overrated?" (Obviously) To answer this, I took a look at the games we played this season. Through 66 games played:

• 29 of them had at least a fight. Our win/loss record in those games is 8-21 (.275 Winning %)
  
• We had more penalty minutes than our opposition in 26 of those games. Our win/loss record in those games is 6-20 (.231 Winning %)
  
• 16 of those games featured a fight(s) while we lead in penalty minutes. Our record in those games is 3-13 (.188 Winning %)
  
• In the 27 games where there the opposition had more penalty minutes and didn't feature any fights, our record is 11-16 (.407 Winning %)

Obviously there are many factors that I didn't account for like when the fight started (Was it within the first 5 minutes of the game? Was it during a blow out?); how the fight started (Planned fight off the draw? Coming to the aid of a team mate?) and who won the fight, but my half-assed analysis shows that 1) The Leafs aren't very good 2) I'm lazy and 3) Skill > Truculence!*

*Outcome of games played may have differed greatly if Vesa Toskala didn't suit up for 26 games

LONG AWAITED PHIL SPECTOR OPENING BRIEF ON APPEAL FILED

Appellate attorney Dennis P. Riordan confers with his client

*****BREAKING NEWS*****

March 10, 2010

Imprisoned music producer Phillip Spector has just filed his long awaited Opening Brief on Appeal (“AOB”)—all 164 pages of it!

This brief is the foundation for the music producer’s bid for a reversal of his second degree murder conviction and for a new trial.

We are reading and analyzing Spector’s AOB as we speak, and we will be posting our analysis early next week.

Many thanks to top notch Phillip Spector appellate counsel Dennis P. Riordan, who was kind enough to provide us with an electronic copy of the AOB for our review. (It is always a treat to read a brief filed by the venerable Riordan & Horgan.)

We note from the cover page of the AOB that Mr. Riordan’s co-counsel in the matter is famed criminal appellate attorney Chuck Savilla of San Diego, California.

Now that is an appellate dream team!

Stay tuned, because from here on out it gets very interesting.

Stop Over

I'm currently in Maccas using the free wifi. I'm in between schools visits. I preached in a chapel in Sydney's South West this morning, now I'm about to go to one of Sydney's posher schools to do their chapel in an hour. Happily I'm doing the same talk so it's not going to be too hard. I'm preaching on Jesus feeding the 5000.

At the school I was at this morning I was taken to visit a classroom called Gumnut Cottage. I thought about referencing Summer Heights High but thought better of it.

I'm speaking again tomorrow on the Central Coast, but it's a whole new talk that I've only just started writing. This one is on Jesus with the Woman at the well. The moral is "Don't have lots of husbands you dirty hussy, drink water."

Lara Bingle is on the news here. Poor lass.

I know this isn't a very insightful post but the wifi is free so why not post?

Is hussy realy rude? Can I say it in a school chapel?

Oscar Time

It's that time of the year again. So here are my Oscar picks for 2010.

Actor in a Leading Role

• Jeff Bridges in “Crazy Heart”
• George Clooney in “Up in the Air”
• Colin Firth in “A Single Man”
• Morgan Freeman in “Invictus”
• Jeremy Renner in “The Hurt Locker”

Actor in a Supporting Role

• Matt Damon in “Invictus”
• Woody Harrelson in “The Messenger”
• Christopher Plummer in “The Last Station”
• Stanley Tucci in “The Lovely Bones”
• Christoph Waltz in “Inglourious Basterds”

Actress in a Leading Role

• Sandra Bullock in “The Blind Side”
• Helen Mirren in “The Last Station”
• Carey Mulligan in “An Education”
• Gabourey Sidibe in “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire”
• Meryl Streep in “Julie & Julia”

Actress in a Supporting Role

• Penélope Cruz in “Nine”
• Vera Farmiga in “Up in the Air”
• Maggie Gyllenhaal in “Crazy Heart”
• Anna Kendrick in “Up in the Air”
• Mo’Nique in “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire”

Animated Feature Film

• “Coraline” Henry Selick
• “Fantastic Mr. Fox” Wes Anderson
• “The Princess and the Frog” John Musker and Ron Clements
• “The Secret of Kells” Tomm Moore
• “Up” Pete Docter

Art Direction

• “Avatar” Art Direction: Rick Carter and Robert Stromberg; Set Decoration: Kim Sinclair
• “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” Art Direction: Dave Warren and Anastasia Masaro; Set Decoration: Caroline Smith
• “Nine” Art Direction: John Myhre; Set Decoration: Gordon Sim
• “Sherlock Holmes” Art Direction: Sarah Greenwood; Set Decoration: Katie Spencer
• “The Young Victoria” Art Direction: Patrice Vermette; Set Decoration: Maggie Gray

Cinematography

• “Avatar” Mauro Fiore
• “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” Bruno Delbonnel
• “The Hurt Locker” Barry Ackroyd
• “Inglourious Basterds” Robert Richardson
• “The White Ribbon” Christian Berger

Costume Design

• “Bright Star” Janet Patterson
• “Coco before Chanel” Catherine Leterrier
• “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” Monique Prudhomme
• “Nine” Colleen Atwood
• “The Young Victoria” Sandy Powell

Directing

• “Avatar” James Cameron
• “The Hurt Locker” Kathryn Bigelow
• “Inglourious Basterds” Quentin Tarantino
• “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” Lee Daniels
• “Up in the Air” Jason Reitman

Documentary (Feature)

• “Burma VJ” Anders Østergaard and Lise Lense-Møller
• “The Cove” Louie Psihoyos and Fisher Stevens
• “Food, Inc.” Robert Kenner and Elise Pearlstein
• “The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers” Judith Ehrlich and Rick Goldsmith
• “Which Way Home” Rebecca Cammisa

Documentary (Short Subject)

• “China’s Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province” Jon Alpert and Matthew O’Neill
• “The Last Campaign of Governor Booth Gardner” Daniel Junge and Henry Ansbacher
• “The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant” Steven Bognar and Julia Reichert
• “Music by Prudence” Roger Ross Williams and Elinor Burkett
• “Rabbit à la Berlin” Bartek Konopka and Anna Wydra

Film Editing

• “Avatar” Stephen Rivkin, John Refoua and James Cameron
• “District 9” Julian Clarke
• “The Hurt Locker” Bob Murawski and Chris Innis
• “Inglourious Basterds” Sally Menke
• “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” Joe Klotz

Foreign Language Film

• “Ajami” Israel
• “The Milk of Sorrow (La Teta Asustada)” Peru
• “A Prophet (Un Prophète)” France
• “The Secret in Their Eyes (El Secreto de Sus Ojos)” Argentina
• “The White Ribbon (Das Weisse Band)” Germany

Makeup

• “Il Divo” Aldo Signoretti and Vittorio Sodano
• “Star Trek” Barney Burman, Mindy Hall and Joel Harlow
• “The Young Victoria” Jon Henry Gordon and Jenny Shircore

Music (Original Score)

• “Avatar” James Horner
• “Fantastic Mr. Fox” Alexandre Desplat
• “The Hurt Locker” Marco Beltrami and Buck Sanders
• “Sherlock Holmes” Hans Zimmer
• “Up” Michael Giacchino

Music (Original Song)

• “Almost There” from “The Princess and the Frog” Music and Lyric by Randy Newman
• “Down in New Orleans” from “The Princess and the Frog” Music and Lyric by Randy Newman
• “Loin de Paname” from “Paris 36” Music by Reinhardt Wagner Lyric by Frank Thomas
• “Take It All” from “Nine” Music and Lyric by Maury Yeston
• “The Weary Kind (Theme from Crazy Heart)” from “Crazy Heart” Music and Lyric by Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett

Best Picture

• “Avatar” James Cameron and Jon Landau, Producers
• “The Blind Side” Gil Netter, Andrew A. Kosove and Broderick Johnson, Producers
• “District 9” Peter Jackson and Carolynne Cunningham, Producers
• “An Education” Finola Dwyer and Amanda Posey, Producers
• “The Hurt Locker” Kathryn Bigelow, Mark Boal, Nicolas Chartier and Greg Shapiro, Producers
• “Inglourious Basterds” Lawrence Bender, Producer
• “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” Lee Daniels, Sarah Siegel-Magness and Gary Magness, Producers
• “A Serious Man” Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, Producers
• “Up” Jonas Rivera, Producer
• “Up in the Air” Daniel Dubiecki, Ivan Reitman and Jason Reitman, Producers

Short Film (Animated)

• “French Roast” Fabrice O. Joubert
• “Granny O’Grimm’s Sleeping Beauty” Nicky Phelan and Darragh O’Connell
• “The Lady and the Reaper (La Dama y la Muerte)” Javier Recio Gracia
• “Logorama” Nicolas Schmerkin
• “A Matter of Loaf and Death” Nick Park

Short Film (Live Action)

• “The Door” Juanita Wilson and James Flynn
• “Instead of Abracadabra” Patrik Eklund and Mathias Fjellström
• “Kavi” Gregg Helvey
• “Miracle Fish” Luke Doolan and Drew Bailey
• “The New Tenants” Joachim Back and Tivi Magnusson

Sound Editing

• “Avatar” Christopher Boyes and Gwendolyn Yates Whittle
• “The Hurt Locker” Paul N.J. Ottosson
• “Inglourious Basterds” Wylie Stateman
• “Star Trek” Mark Stoeckinger and Alan Rankin
• “Up” Michael Silvers and Tom Myers

Sound Mixing

• “Avatar” Christopher Boyes, Gary Summers, Andy Nelson and Tony Johnson
• “The Hurt Locker” Paul N.J. Ottosson and Ray Beckett
• “Inglourious Basterds” Michael Minkler, Tony Lamberti and Mark Ulano
• “Star Trek” Anna Behlmer, Andy Nelson and Peter J. Devlin
• “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers and Geoffrey Patterson

Visual Effects

• “Avatar” Joe Letteri, Stephen Rosenbaum, Richard Baneham and Andrew R. Jones
• “District 9” Dan Kaufman, Peter Muyzers, Robert Habros and Matt Aitken
• “Star Trek” Roger Guyett, Russell Earl, Paul Kavanagh and Burt Dalton

Writing (Adapted Screenplay)

• “District 9” Written by Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell
• “An Education” Screenplay by Nick Hornby
• “In the Loop” Screenplay by Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche
• “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” Screenplay by Geoffrey Fletcher
• “Up in the Air” Screenplay by Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner

Writing (Original Screenplay)

• “The Hurt Locker” Written by Mark Boal
• “Inglourious Basterds” Written by Quentin Tarantino
• “The Messenger” Written by Alessandro Camon & Oren Moverman
• “A Serious Man” Written by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen
• “Up” Screenplay by Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, Story by Pete Docter, Bob Peterson, Tom McCarthy

Contact

So my friend Chris Morphew wrote a book, and invited me to his Birthday party which was also a book launch. He was selling his book there for a bargain $15. So I went to get the incredible discount, and in the hopes of seeing some famous authors there. Seeing as he's a published author I was pretty sure he'd have a few others hanging around him at his party. I thought maybe he might have some models there as well, which he quite possibly could be dating. I was disappointed to find that Stephen King and Matthew Riley were not in attendance. Nor were there any models. Or if there were, I missed them. His cousins were there however and I played a board game with them before all going and doing rock-star cocaine together in the bathroom.

Not all of that last sentence was true.

Anyway all this is preface to say that when I bought the bargain priced book I told Chris I would review it so, this is my review.



Contact is the second book of Morphew's series The Phoenix Files. It's about a three teenagers, Peter, Luke and Jordan, who find themselves living together in a mysterious town, owned, built and run by a corporation. As it turns out this corporation is, like all corporations except Apple, evil. The corporation is planning to kill everyone in the world. At this stage I'm not sure how that's good business practice as they are, presumably, destroying their entire customer base and severely limiting their market expansion potential.

But I'm not sure that's the point. The point is, when the first book, Arrival, starts it's 100 days until the end of the world. And three teenagers must work together to uncover the mysteries and stop the impending apocalypse. And so far, the adventure, has been a lot of fun.

Pacing-wise the book reads like a Matthew Reilly book for young teens. Every chapter ends on a note of suspense. It's not the kind of book you should read before bed, it's easy to read and hard to put down.

The first book was written in first person perspective through Luke, the newest kid in town. The second book is also written from first person perspective, but through the eyes of Peter, the other teenagers in the trio of mystery solvers. When I started reading the book I didn't realise the perspective had changed between book 1 and 2. So I spent the first third of the book trying to figure out why this kid's life was so different from what I remembered from the first book. Once I solved that mystery though, the book made a whole lot more sense.

One theme I'm noticing is that all the adults in the book seem to be either evil, crazy, ignorant or useless. For young teen fiction, this seems like a rather useful ploy. For teenagers to remain the heroes on works of fiction there has to be some legitimate way for the teenagers to remain the heroes throughout the whole book. In the case of an evil corporation trying to kill the world and three teenagers trying to stop it, it's hard to plausibly pull this off without sidelining all the adults for one reason or another.

Knowing that Chris is a raging Christian, and probably a CS Lewis fan, I've been looking for the Aslan character or no-so-subtle gospel allegory through out the books. Much to Chris' credit, I haven't found Aslan yet, but he is forfeiting the opportunity of getting regularly quoted in sermons after he manages to get two beavers to succinctly explain the character of God.

Anyway, I realise I haven't really said what I thought of the book, and as this is a review I probably should. I did rather enjoy the book. It's such a fun read. The plot moves along fast making it rather hard to put down. Due to it being pitched at the young teen crowd it's a pretty easy read and makes you feel like you've got excellent reading skills when you realise you're two thirds of the way through the book when you thought you'd only just started.

Peter, the main character is rather annoying at times due to his excessive crush on one of the other main characters. He regularly deserves a good slap. Though his annoyingness levels never reach the levels of Harry in Potter 5, which made me want to stop reading.

The massive capabilities and evilness of the evil corporation give Peter, Luke and Jordan a task of sufficient magnitude that I'm not sure how Chris is going write another five books while keeping the three of them alive. Maybe he only has four more books to write. Either way, I'm looking forward to seeing how things develop for the rest of the series.

All up, these books are worth the read, and not just because I know the person who wrote them, though that probably does help.

Arrival and Contact are available in all good bookstores and at Chris' birthday parties.

LA DA’S RETALIATION “STRIKING AND RAMPANT,” FEDERAL JUDGE FINDS

LAT

U.S. District Judge Otis D. Wright II has issued a preliminary injunction against Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley, expressly finding that Cooley's retaliation against union members in his office is “striking and rampant” and in violation of law, the Los Angeles times reported yesterday.

The injunction orders Cooley and other Los Angeles County officials not to discipline or discriminate against prosecutors for belonging to the union that represents hundreds of local deputy district attorneys.

The order and findings were made in a lawsuit filed by the District Attorneys Union alleging that Cooley and others transferred to remote offices, demoted and gave sub par job performance reviews to prosecutors in retaliation for union membership and activities in violation of federal law.

Cooley, who is the county's top prosecutor, could be held in contempt of court if he ignores the order.

The order comes at a bad time for Cooley, who recently announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination for California Attorney General.

COPS RAISE POSSIBILITY OF BAY AREA SHRINK’S PROSECUTION IN BOSTON ON CHILD MOLEST CHARGES

Joel Silver can still remember his private sessions with child psychiatrist William H. Ayres at a renowned Boston guidance center decades ago, the Boston Herald reports (image, second to the left front-page column-below-the-fold).

“I thought he was going to ask me why I didn’t like school. That’s why I whas there. But everything was sexual.’’

Ayres’ alleged misconduct as a Harvard affiliated psychiatrist 50 years ago is relevant because in 30 days the San Francisco Bay Area child psychiatrist will be retried on allegations that he molested several patients in his San Mateo, California practice over the last 30 years; Ayers' criminal trial last year on the decades old allegations ended in a hung jury.

Ayres, who is 78 and a former president of the American Society of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, insists he is innocent of the charges he is facing. “He has spent almost all his life working with children and being dedicated to the community, so he’s anxious to clear his reputation and his name,’’ said Jonathan D. McDougall, Ayres’s lawyer—who took over for Ayres after the embattled shrink’s first attorney, Doron Weinberg, bowed out of the case after the first jury refused to unanimously convict on the decades old evidence presented.

Five years ago, Ayres paid $395,000 to settle a civil suit filed by a California man who was barred from pursuing criminal charges only because his allegations of abuse were too old to prosecute. The settlement expressly provided that Dr. Ayres admitted no wrongdoing—but questions remain.

According to the Boston Globe article, officials at Harvard Medical School and Children’s Hospital acknowledged that Ayres was an instructor at Harvard and a resident child psychiatrist at the Judge Baker Guidance Center, from 1959 to 1963. Since then, the Center has been renamed the Judge Baker Children’s Center, located on Mission Hill.

Officials at Harvard and Children’s also stressed that they have no complaints on file against Ayres.

Boston area law enforcement officials are interested in Ayres in part because they might be able to prosecute him if they can show he committed crimes against children while living in Massachusetts. That’s because the clock in the state’s statute of limitations - the period after a crime during which prosecutors may file charges - would have stopped when Ayres crossed state lines to begin a new life in California. Normally, civil and criminal statues of limitation are “tolled” (the time clock to sue or prosecute is halted) during the time period that an alleged wrongdoer is outside of the state where the alleged offenses occurred.

Meanwhile, scores of now adult men (and their families) who consider themselves alleged victims of the now notorious child therapist eagerly await the upcoming San Mateo molest trial as promising some form of “closure”.

Ayres at age 77 and in ill health, in the meantime, has literally become a an infirm shell of his former self and it remains to be seen what satisfaction (if any) can be afforded his many alleged bicoastal victims through his incarceration—should he be convicted of the charges (which appears likely) and should he live long enough to be punished for his alleged crimes—let alone remember them—(which appears less certain).

JUDGE JAILS 20 MINUTE LATE JUROR FOR MOM’S SURGERY, CHILDCARE ISSUES

A Michigan trial judge has ordered a stay-at-home mom to attend a murder trial as a spectator and then to do 24 hours in jail because she was 20 minutes late to jury selection due to her mother’s oral surgery and child care arrangements that fell through.

Carmela Khury, was juggling child care, her mother’s surgery, and a summons to appear for jury duty.

When she was late for jury selection because her mother was having surgery, a backup babysitter fell through and her husband was already at work, she called the court. Told the judge would arrest her if she didn't appear, she arrived late along with her 8-month-old and 3-year-old, the Detroit Free Press reports.

Acting without a hearing, advisement of rights, or appointed counsel—and with no opportunity to present a defense, Judge Leo Bowman found her in contempt, ordered her to sit as a spectator for the expected two-week-long murder trial and sentenced her to 24 hours in the county jail, and ordered her to report to jail immediately after the trial.

What a gentleman!

In addition to holding Khury for days, the judge also detained Ramesh Sapra, a businessman, who told Bowman jury service would cause his small company harm because it was facing an upcoming deadline.

Fortunately for the people of the great state of Michigan—as well as Judge Leo Bowman’s future victims of this walking violation of civil rights—Judge Bowman is under investigation by Michigan judicial watchdog authorities.

Room Duck Dust

I'm in my new place. This is my new room. It had two picture hooks. Now it only has one.

I've been a little too busy to blog. Travelling all over Sydney preaching to school kids, which isn't that impressive because they have to be there.

Here's a duck that joined me for lunch in Picton the other day. As you can see it was so excited to be eating lunch with me it pooed.




And this is the vacuum cleaner before I vacuumed my previous room:



And this is it after:



As you can see, either I'm very good at vacuuming or very bad.

There is currently a girl asleep in our lunch room. She may be a homeless person or she may be a housemate's sister. It was dark so I didn't investigate. If she is a homeless person maybe we're turning our place into a single women's refuge. That'd be a great way for three single guys to meet some ladies. If we're not already doing it, I might put the idea to the boys for consideration.