Shopping Nightmare
I was arrested for Trespassing on 3/19 and 6 weeks later charged with battery and disorderly conduct. The stories of the Security Guard from Jewel Foods and Monterrey Security guards was totally different from what they wrote in their incident report, the Chicago Police Report was different, their written statements were different and on 5/16/2009 their testimony in court was totally different from all the evidence. I was found not Guilty of Trespassing, Battery and Disorderly Conduct.
This entire incident started because I questioned the customer service of Jewel Foods and I was denied a manager by the Jewel Foods Security Guard. When the Guard denied me a manager he smiled as if it was a joke. I told the security guard, “What do I have to do? Do I have to go down the street and get some of my rich white friends and come back so you can open up the self check out line? That comment made the Jewel Security Guard mad and he followed me to the grocery line and blocked me in, knocked my orange juice out of my hands, grabbed me by the arms and pushed me out of the line. I was pushed to register #3 where I was picked up and slammed to the concrete floor where I yelled for help because I was in pain. I was dragged from register #3 to Register #10 by a Jewel Food Security Guard by one handcuff which cut into my skin and I was dragged by a Monterrey Security Guard by the other arm. I was yelling because I was in pain because of the slam to the floor and the handcuff cutting into my skin while I was being dragged. The security guards were trying to pull me into the Loss Prevention Office which the customer did not allow that to happen because they witnessed the security guard touching me for no reason.
A customer called 911 and once the Chicago Police arrived the customers were trying to explain to them what happen but refused to listen. The customer who called 911 tried to explain to the Chicago Police Officer he called 911 and the officer choose not to listen. In the Chicago Police Report it states, The Reporting Officer Was responding to a battery: The customer who called said, “They are beating this guy up in front of Jewel.” I’m wondering why did the Chicago Police refused to take a statement from the customer? Did the Chicago Police look at the video evidence?
I went to court on 4/30 to fight the Charges of Criminal Trespassing and the Jewel Foods filed an additional charge of Battery and Disorderly Conduct.
3/19 Criminal Trespassing to Land: “KNOWINGLY REMAINED UPON THE LAND OF JEWEL FOODS LOCATED AT 1224 S. WABASH AFTERRECIEVING NOTICE FROM OWNER/OCCUPANT.AGENT TO DEPART.”
4/30 Battery: The Security Guard signed a complaint in Court claiming Battery. “Intentionally or knowingly without legal justification made contact of an insulting or provoking nature with the complainant in that the defendant swung fist at complaint hitting complainant in the arm.”
4/30 Disorderly Conduct: The Cashier signed a complaint in Court claiming Disorderly Conduct. Knowingly acted in such an unreasonable manner as to disturb another and to provoke a breach of the peach in that the defendant was screaming and yelling which prevented the complainant from performing her duties as a cashier for Jewel.
Go to Youtube and type in “Jewel-Osco Security Guard Gone Wild”
Video #1 and 2 will show the Security Guard following me to the grocery line.
Video # 3 will show the Security Guard grabbing me and pushing me out of the Grocery Line.
Video # 4 will show the Security Guard lifting me up from behind and slamming me to the floor.
Video # 4, #5 and #6 will show I was dragged by the security guards.
Video # 7 will show I was dragged and jerked by the handcuff and arrested by the Chicago Police Officers.
The Trespassing Charges
The security guard told the judge he told me in the Grocery Line that if I could not keep quiet he would have to tell me to leave. The Judge asked the Security Guard, “So you gave the defendant a condition?” The security guard said, “Yes.”
1st My attorney asked the security guard to read the Trespassing Warning in court and when he read the warning he did not know what time it was given to me. There’s two different times on the warning.. 1st It states it was given to me at 1:15am and 2nd It states it was given to me at 1:25am. There was no way I received any Trespassing warning because at 1:15am I was grabbed and pushed out of the line and slammed to the floor at. Then I was dragged from register 3 to 10 by one handcuff.
2nd The trespassing warning also state, “The above named person was advised that if he/she returns to said premises that he/she would be in violation of this Trespass Warning and be subject to arrest.” In order for the Trespassing Warning to be valid I had to leave and come back onto the Premises I was band from.
3rd My attorney asked the security guard the following question to show I was illegally detain with warning.
A: Where was my client standing? The security guard replied in line.
B: What was on my Client left side? The security guard replied, a pop machine and a candy rack.
C: What was on my Client Right side? The security guard said the self-check out line.
D: Who was standing behind my Client? The security guard said he was.
F: My attorney said, “If my client wanted leave out of the store would he go in the direction you were standing which is behind my client or would he go in the direction the customer were facing. Better yet, would it be easier to say the only Exits would be in the front of the store and not the back? The security guard said the only Exit would be the front of the store?
My attorney said, if you were blocking his rear, the pop machine and the candy rack is blocking his left, the self-check out line was blocking his right and the 10 to 15 customers in front of my client was blocking his front which prevented him from Exiting the Store, please explain to the courts if you gave my client a trespassing warning to leave, how was he going to leave if he was blocked in? The security guard could not answer.
4th The security guard said they gave the Trespassing Warning to the Chicago Police after I was arrested and assumed they gave it to me.
5th In Jewel and Monterrey Security they lied about the security guard was telling me to leave several times and that never occurred.
6th The Security Guard from Monterrey Security was asked why did he sign his name on the Trespassing Warning as a witness? He said I was in the parking lot and I did not know what was going on?
The charges were dropped because it showed he blocked me in, he had no reason to stop follow me to the grocery line which he told the judge he did not follow me, the times were wrong and in order for the trespassing warning to be valid he would have to word it correctly, give it to me directly and time must match.
Battery Charges:
1: The Video Evidence shows I never swung at anyone.
2: The Judge looked at the Video Evidence and said, “It clearly shows the security guard grabbed the defendant and there is not proof of the defendant swinging according the the video evidence.”
3: The Security Guard from Monterrey Security wrote in his statement, “At this point the man dropped to the ground of his own will and started to scream.”
4. In court the Security Guard told the Judge he could not remember because it’s been so long but later said, “1st it look like he dropped to the ground on his own. 2nd it look like Christopher Mendoza laid him on the ground and 3rd I did not have a clear view.”
5. The video evidence shows I was slammed to the floor by Jewel Loss Prevention and Monterrey Security Guard was standing directly in front of me.
On May 16, 2008 Christopher Mendoza told the Judge that I swung at him with a bag of Pistachios Nuts and when he blocked my swing with his arm and the Pistachios Nuts when everywhere on the floor. The Monterrey Security Guard support the story also.
March 19, 2007 Christopher Mendoza wrote in his Loss Prevention Incident Report, “He Gestured as if he was going to strike me, I blocked his arem and tried to handcuff the subject. Kerry Kielbon (Monterrey Security) assisted me.”
March 19, 2007 Christopher Mendoza told the Chicago Police, “At this time subject was asked to leave premise, subject refused stating he would make a scene if security touched him subject was asked again to leave and refused, at this point security attempted to place subject into customdy, scuffle ensued while handcuffs were being placed on offender.”
April 30, 2007 Christopher Mendoza filed a complaint in court stating, “Intentionally or knowingly without legal justification made contact of an insulting or provoking nature with the Complainant in that: The defendant swung fist at complainant hitting complainant in the arm.
May 16, 2008 Christopher Mendoza told the judge I swung toward his face with a bag of Pistachios and he blocked the swing with his arm which made the bag of Pistachios fall on the floor.
My attorney asked where did the allege swing take place and the security guard was not able to give that information. My attorney asked did this take place after you tried to arrest my client or before you tried to arrest my client? The Security Guard from Jewel Foods said, “It took place before I tried to arrest him.” So my attorney said we should be able to see Pistachios Nuts everywhere on the floor, Correct? The Jewel Food Security Guard agreed?
We showed the Video Evidence from Line #1 Which show no punches were thrown and it clearly showed he grabbed me and pushed me out of the line. We paused the video which showed I had Pistachios in my hand and we showed the floor area where Pistachios show have been and there were not Pistachios on the floor because I had the bag in my hand. We showed Video Evidence from Line #3 which show the Jewel Foods Security Guard picking me up from behind which holding my arms in the air. We pause the video and it showed I had Pistachios in my hands and there were not Pistachios on the floor. We were about to show more of the video and the Judge said, “That’s Enough.” I’m sure she was in disbelief of what happen and the video showed they were lying..
The judge looked at the video and said, It clearly shows the security guard grabbing the defending and pushing him out of the line. There is no proof showing the defendant swing at anyone and there are no Pistachios on the floor.
The Jewel Security guard was asked if I was handcuff and he replied, “No”. The video evidence showed the security guard dragging me from lane #3 to lane #4 and you see customers taking pictures with their phones because he was dragging and jerking me by the handcuff.
Disorderly Conduct:
The Jewel Food Cashier claimed my yelling for help and 911 stopped her from doing her job. The video evidence clearly show she never stop working and did not witnessed the incident.
The cashier wrote the following statement on 4/3/2007: “I was the only line open and the line was long and customers were complaining about the line but there was no help I had no extra bodies to perform the job.”
The cashier did not show up to court on April 1, 2008 and on May 16, 2008 my attorney asked to have the disorderly charge dropped but a Manager in the Loss Prevention Department said Linda Williams passed away. The Judge allowed the Disorderly Conduct to stay because the Loss Prevention Manager stood in her place. The charges were later dismissed because there was no proof of Disorderly Conduct I did not need to show any video evidence to prove my innocence.
Jewel Foods and Monterrey Security tried to intimidate me not to come to court and I was harassed for about 8 months. I was also told by the Loss Prevention Manager if I sign a letter no to file Civil Suit they would drop the charges. The Loss Prevention Manager also stated, ” Beside, I’m 22 and Zero when I come to court.” I told him the charges are weak and false and I’m going to fight this in court.
On May 16, 2008 I was offered a plea of 3 months supervision from Jewel Food Loss Prevention. I was also offered to plea no Contest and to stay out of Jewel. I told my attorney no because I did not do anything wrong and I would rather fight this in court.
On May 16, 2008 I was found Not Guilty of all the charges filed against me.
I was found not Guilty of Criminal Trespassing to Land
I was found not Guilty of Disorderly Conduct
I was found not Guilty of Battery
The Court Transcript will show the Security Guards lied from day 1 and 95% of their statement was conflicting.
Joseph Robinson Jr
Bhalessa Gandoh-Lengendaries
Ghulam Rasool Azad: A true Educationist
Sadaket Malik
It has revealed by our research that in different parts of the state people used to speak Kashmiri, if the local language is mixed with kashmiri but it is true that in ancient period some people migrated to Jammu region to make their haitation overhere.
It is in Mahgam Kashmir that Batt family migrated to start their habitation in Chamba District of Hamachal Pradesh and some Muslim Batt’s stayed in improvised part of Bhalessa i.e in Soti Village. From time to time they (Bhat family) became permanent peasants of Soti Bhalessa. One of the ancestors Kh. Khazra Batt was regarded as a leading peasent of the time. In this Peasantry family, Ghulam Rasool Azad was born in the year 1916. This was a period of ignorance, There was a no media, no education and no leadership. There were only single to two schools in Bhalessa, one was Primary school kilhotran wherein the people used to get elementary education at that time. Kh. Khazra Batt gets admission of Ghulam Rasool in this Primary school. Ghulam Rasool (Azad) passed his Primary basic education from this school in 1929. On the basis of his interest towards studies his parents put him in Bhaderwah Amar Singh High School for further studies.
On the one hand, there was no transportation, no media and poverty had its head high, but Ghulam Rasool Azad used to exhibit his talent with the patronage of the well deserved teachers in Amar Singh High School.
In 1935, Ghulam Rasool Azad passed entrance examination from Jammu Centre, he got encouraged and put forward his education and leadership.
In 1939, he did his graduation in Mathematics with double course and got Post graduated in 1943 from Punjab University. During his studentship he was entrusted the responsibility of Student leadership. He was appointed as a Publicity secretary of Punjab University Students Union.
It was very difficult for a person at that time to get education and Azad proved as a torch bearer. There were only three rare persons like Ghulam Rasool Azad of Soti, Prof. Umer Din Malik of Bhatyas and Abdul Aziz Batt of Kilhotran to get higher education.
To democratise the system of education and make the poor farmers of Bhalessa familiar about education, Ghulam Rasool Azad launched intensive awareness mission to change their mindset. He used to get oath from children to pledge for education.
In 1946, he was appointed as a teacher in Shri Ranbir High School Jammu, during his tenure, he strived hard and worked honestly. The salary was too small but Azad proved as an ideal teacher. In this period, there was discrimination due to colonial rule. He started Jammu Provincial Teachers Association and pleaded the cause of teachers. Due to indefinite struggle for the cause of teachers, He and his associates were dismissed from service in 1946 by the government. Lo and behold, Azad not stopped his sprit of social work and leadership. It was a time of Communal disharmony. Divisive policies were in place.
In another phase, Maharaja Quited the state and Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah resumed the office. Sheikh got abreast of the leadership satire of Azad and appointed him as teacher in Shri Partap High School Srinagar. It was time of disamity of hindu’s and muslims. In 1947, Azad was entrusted the responsibility by the government to look after the welfare and prosperity of masses of the then Doda region. He reached every nook and corner of the district doda to spread the massage of love and friendship. The need was not to look after the developmental side, but to unite the scattered hindu’s and muslims. Azad played a pro active role to end disamity. In this way the peole loved his qualities and his sprit of leadership. Government rewaded Ghulam Rasool Azad for his outstanding contribution in that period. Sheikh sahib at that time quoted in his speeched
“Kash sobha jammu ki Tarah Sobha Kashmir main
ik Ghulam Rasool Azad paida hota, to maire khuwabun
Ka naya Kashmir taamir hota.”
Like Jammu region, If Kashmir region might got the leader like Ghulam Rasool Azad, it would to true that my dream of Naya Kashmir will be fulfilled. Shaikh sahib told kashmiri leadership at that time.
Keeping in mind his political satire, he was appointed General Secretary National Conference in 1947 and in 1948 he was appointed as Assistant Inspector of Schools for Rajouri, Nowshera, Poonch. During this period, he visited every school snd reached every teacher for educational advancement. He got a great status and sympathy in the people.
Azad was appointed as a President of National Conference Doda for the welfare of people.
In 1950, Azad was appointed as Field Publicity Officer Jammu. From 1949-51 he was District Vice President National Conference of Rajouri. In the same period, he was given another responsibility at the capacity of PA to Director Education. He was appinted as a member of All J&K General Council NC. Joint secretary NC Jammu region, Being an officer Azad was full of leadership qualities. That’s why ruling political party like National Conference get advantage of his political satire and sprit of social work. His top priory was to look after the welfare of the people, and got a special place in the hearts of poor people. Sheikh Abdullah gave him a plenty of responsibilities.
Later, He was inducted as an Inspector of schools Udhampur and Doda from 1951-54. and inspected all the schools, and conceded the demands of general people of the region. He was appointed as a Headmaster of Teacher’s Training School Bhaderwah. It is leant by us that Teachers Training school was opned by Azad himself. Its was a period when Sheikh Abdullah was arrested and Bhakshi Ghulam Mohammed was appointed as a Prime Minister of the state. The state was politically unstable. One the one hand It was campaign of Paraja Paishad and on the other hand a demand for “Raj Shumari”. Azad’s initiative turned towards the limping back the normalcy in the region. He used to say in his speeched:-
“ Na Hinduism ko khatra hai, na islam ko dur,
Ho Jawo Shair o shankar”
Azad as a freedom fighter was pinched with the people who used religion as a tool for gaining power. When Azad’s milti faceted qualities listened the then Prime Minister Bhakshi Ghulam Mohammed, he was deputed to England for DAATP training course. He visted educational institutions of UK, England, Wales, Scotland, Belgium, Thailand, West Germany, Austrailia, Italy, Switzerland, USA and France.
After his return from England, he was appointed to analyse the economic conditions of Doda, Poonch and Rajouri in 1956. He was appointed as a Principal of Government Higher Secondary School R S Pura in 1956-1957. This was the only Hr. secondary school in Jammu region.
In this period, Corruption was increased in an alarming rate. Poverty was its heads high, economy was poor. He pointed truth before higher ups and suggested roadmaps to overcome corruption and increase well being of the people. He resigned from service and contested election for the poor people on the behalf of teacher fraternity. Government mandated a lady candidate against him in the election. But Azad got elected to Assembly. In Kashmir, a candidate namely Dina Nath General secretary was mandated by Azad and was elected. In another trip, he was elected unopposed as MLC and worked upto 1957. In 1955, he founded All Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh Teacher’s Association. From 1955-69, he pleaded the cause of teachers. In 1958-59, 1959-60, and 1960-61 he remained Vice President of All India Federation of Education Profession. Being an educationist, he also worked for the cause of education at national level. In 1961,He was one of the delegate of 34 delegates to attend the 10th onference of World Confederation of Organisations of Teaching Profession for the world education cause.
Government led by Bhakhshi Ghulam Mohd. Invited Azad to re-join the government service and appointed him Dy Director Education Jammu in 1962-63. Government not tolerated his courage and appointed him as a Principal of Government Degree College Bhaderwah. He was again taransfered to Kashmir to work as a Dy. Director School Education Kashmir.upto 1971. In 1969-71 he remained Secretary J&K Sports Council. From 1963-64 he worked as a Saint member of Jammu University. and then member of J&K State Board of School Education in 1965. Member of Text Book Advisory Boad, After he finaly retired from the post of Dy. Director Education, He was appointed as a Fazil member of Anti Corruption Commission in 1973-75, member J&K Planning Board. Member District Development Board Doda in 1976-78, President Indo Sovait Cultural society (1971-73) Member Bhaderwah Welfare Front (1975-79), Chairman Bhaderwah Public Forum (1982) Chairman Advisory Council of J&K Education Officers Association, (1984)
It was on 24th of January 1995, the land lost its great scholar, as ill luck would have it this legendary man not remained among the people.
Sadaket Malik
http://www.articlesbase.com/article-marketing-articles/bhalessa-gandohlengendaries-1100344.html
Is it possible to become prison pen pals with Charles Manson?
Charlie is one of my personal heroes. I think I’m one of the few people on this planet that can truly understand his psyche because we are so much alike. I realize he doesn’t have too much to accomplish on his daily schedule, so I’m sure he would have the time to pen me some heartfelt letters of endearment, just like I’d write him. Does the prison in which he is serving his sentence allow the prisoners to have pen pals?
http://www.charlesmansonfanclub.com/CONTACT.htm
Are Alternative Treatments for Adhd Right for Your Child?
If you are reading this article it means you’re not really sold on prescription drugs for your child. Just like you, I also did some research on alternative treatments for ADHD. I needed to know what treatment for ADHD was going to work and also be safe for my son.
Here is a brief summary on the alternative treatments for ADHD. Just remember though, that a combination of the following therapies will increase the success rate in treatment for ADHD.
Dietary Control:
A number of diets have been suggested for people with ADHD. Various studies have reported behavioral improvement with diets that restrict possible allergens in the diet.
There are many diets available for an ADHD child. Which one is chosen should be decided by discussing it with your child’s health care professional. That is because each child is different and foods affect children differently. I will tell you this though. Absolutely restrict junk food because of all the additives, food dyes, MSG, and Lord knows what else. Refined carbs is another one, such as white bread.
Behavioral Therapy:
This is one of the most popular methods for alternative treatments for ADHD. With the help of a trained health care professional, such as a child psychologist, behavior and thoughts can be modified so that a child can learn to relate well to others. My son went for therapy for two years and and very much benefited from this treatment for ADHD.
Herbal and Homeopathic Remedies:
I tried my son on a prescription drug at first but soon turned to herbal remedies as a treatment for ADHD. I just didn’t like having a zombie in the house! Besides that, herbal remedies can be just as effective as “Ritalin”, but way safer. Some of the effective herbs readily available are Ginkgo biloba, Panax ginseng and melatonin. They are all good, safe alternative treatments for ADHD.
There are homeopathic remedies which will decrease some, if not most, of the negative symptoms of ADHD and allow the child to focus more easily. Now that I have tried both with my son, natural remedies should be considered first instead of prescription drugs. When combined with dietary control/restrictions and behavior therapy, natural remedies have been show to be effective in helping to decrease the symptoms of ADHD.
As a Mom, I only want what is best for my son’s health in the long run. No one knows the long-term effects from prescription medication, so to be on the safe side I decided that alternative treatments for ADHD would be the route we would take. Do your research and make an informed decision because it’s your child’s health at risk.
Diana Ketchen
http://www.articlesbase.com/alternative-medicine-articles/are-alternative-treatments-for-adhd-right-for-your-child-725392.html
Hell or Heaven: Firsthand Authors Describe your Fate
Our earthly existence demands that we plan for our future in the best way that we can. We must conduct our affairs in this life in a prudent manner regarding investments, education, insurance and such to guide us towards the goal of safety and contentment. But what about a strategy regarding the afterlife when our brief stay on this planet is over?
Bill Wiese and Don Piper are two authors who describe in vivid detail the ultimate outcomes of our worldly lives in books respectively entitled “23 Minutes in Hell: One Man’s Story About What He Saw, Heard, and Felt in that Place of Torment” and “90 Minutes in Heaven: A True Story of Death and Life”. The aptly named books describe firsthand the reality of two extreme destinations one of which lies ahead of each of us according to our own freewill choices.
Wiese’s “23 Minutes in Hell” began at 3:00 a.m. on Monday, November 23, 1998 when he found himself being hurled through the air completely out of control before landing in what appeared to be a prison cell. He was “fully awake and cognizant” throughout the entire event during which he was led to experience a peril well beyond what can be imagined in this life.
“There is never any peace of mind. No rest from the torments, the screams, the fear, the thirst, the lack of breath, no sleep, the stench, the heat, the hopelessness, and the isolation from people.” Bill adds that “this place was so terrifying, so intense, and so hostile that it would be impossible for me to exaggerate the horror.” The hideous, seething creatures together with an overwhelming sense of hopelessness made one trapped in a “sea of tormented souls”.
The other end of the spectrum is explained by Don Piper’s “90 Minutes in Heaven” which describes his experience while declared dead after his car was struck by an eighteen-wheeler at about 11:45 a.m. on January 18, 1989. He was greeted in the heavenly realm by what he called a “celestial welcoming committee” of incredibly joyous people whom he had known previously that had passed on from earthly life.
Piper described the sensational level of bliss by stating that “everything I experienced was like a first-class buffet for the senses. I had never felt such powerful embraces or feasted my eyes on such beauty. Heaven’s light and texture defy earthly eyes or explanation. Warm, radiant light engulfed me. As I looked around, I could hardly grasp the vivid, dazzling colors. Every hue and tone surpassed anything I had ever seen.” Don was in another dimension and felt “fully alive” in a state of awe that human words are not capable of expressing.
The hell and heaven experiences of both authors are precisely in line with another source that has displayed irrefutable accuracy over time. This book is a compilation of 66 works written by about 40 authors over the course of approximately 1,500 years in three different languages on three different continents. The book that calls one’s attention to what awaits all in the afterlife is called the Bible.
The evidence is clear that the Bible gives harsh descriptions in regards to the reality of the “damnation of hell” ( Matthew 23:33 ). It warns of “everlasting destruction” ( II Thessalonians 1:9 ), “place of torment” ( Luke 16:28 ), “fire that never shall be quenched” ( Mark 9:43 ), ), “weeping and gnashing of teeth” ( Luke 13:28 ), “where their worm dieth not” ( Mark 9:44 ), “everlasting fire” ( Matthew 18:8 ), “outer darkness” ( Matthew 8:12 }, and “lake of fire burning with brimstone” ( Revelation 19:20 ) to name but a few of the wake-up calls regarding the “danger of hell fire” ( Matthew 5:22 ).
Heaven, on the other hand, is a place where “they shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more” ( Revelation 7:16 ) and “there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.” ( Revelation 21: 4 ). It will be an indescribable “eternal weight of glory” ( 2 Corinthians 4:17 ) for those who cherish and abide by the Bible’s teachings. It will be a place of pure love beyond our finite comprehension.
Bill Wiese gives his support and states that “the Bible is far more unique than any other book written. It has been scrutinized by an endless array of scholars, historians, archeologists, scientists, mathematicians, and the like for thousands of years. There have not been any discrepancies or errors that could not be cleared up with good scholarship.”
Bill supports this claim by listing quotes from both acclaimed scholars and respected historical figures who support the absolute reliability of the Bible. Don Piper is also one who conveys his full conviction with respect to the truth of the Scriptures without question.
So what guidelines are to be followed to enter the gates of heaven and avoid the described torments of hell after reading “23 Minutes in Hell” and “90 Minutes in Heaven” and the most popular book in the history of the world? The answer is clearly to pay close attention to the life and teachings of Jesus Christ as the only “mediator between God and men” ( 1 Timothy 2:5 ) to gain our heavenly triumph.
Both Bill Wiese who suffered the anguish of hell and Don Piper who had to leave the indescribable bliss of heaven to an agonizing recovery believe that their lives are meant to tell the world of the consequences that await us all. They are using their experiences to warn anyone and everyone about the realities of what they lived through. They also wish to share the truth that the only way to escape the eternal and hopeless trappings of hell is a commitment to the saving grace of Jesus Christ.
My own unfortunate life events are what led me to find this truth. I have suffered the effects of having been comatose for 11 days, walked away from a burning car wreck, been struck by a Mack truck and have escaped a handful of other potentially deadly or crippling circumstances. Failure has certainly not been a stranger in my life in other ways as well. I share a belief with the authors that my experiences in this life are meant for salvation on both a personal level as well as for readers who simply need to get right with God through Jesus Christ.
My advice? Find and join, if you haven’t already, a true Christian church that bases its teachings strictly on the verses contained in the Bible. Avoid at all costs any “feel good” or watered down alternatives that compromise the truth for the sake of profit or political correctness. Finally, believe the words of Jesus in John 14: 6 of “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” Your eternity depends on it.
( Bill Wiese’s “23 Minutes in Hell: One Man’s Story About What He Saw, Heard, and Felt in that Place of Torment” and Don Piper’s “90 Minutes in Heaven: A True Story of Death and Life” and the Bible can be purchased at http://www.christianbook.com )
Brian Connors
http://www.articlesbase.com/religion-articles/hell-or-heaven-firsthand-authors-describe-your-fate-138609.html
What is the difference between a police state and martial law?
Is it when the military declares a dictatorship on Americans or is it something else. I’m a little concerned. I’ve read web pages that suggest that Prez. Obama want’s America to become a police state. What do you think?
We are in a police state. By this I mean we are being observed and monitored at all times. Sitting at home on the computer, the intermittent location of your cellphone, power usage monitoring, all these things are transmitting data that IF someone wanted to put you under surveillance, the passing of the Patriot Act allows them to throw the switch and do so without having probable cause or warrant to do so.
The PATRIOT Act is the single most offensive attack on your Constitutional Rights ever implemented. It was disguised as a form of protection from terrorists, but in reality it doesn’t nothing of the sort.
Martial law however, if you become familiar with the Executive Orders that Obama and previous presidents have signed you will understand clearly the difference between a police state and Martial law.
From Wikipedia:
An executive order in the United States is an order issued by the President, the head of the executive branch of the federal government. In other countries, similar edicts may be known as decrees, or orders-in-council. Executive orders may also be issued at the state level by a state’s Governor or at the local level by the city’s Mayor. U.S. Presidents have issued Executive Orders since 1789, usually to help officers and agencies of the Executive branch manage the operations within the Federal Government itself. Executive orders do have the full force of law since issuances are typically made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress, some of which specifically delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation), or are believed to have their authority for issuances based in a power inherently granted to the Executive by the Constitution. It is these cited or perceived justifications made by a President when authoring Executive Orders that have come under criticism for exceeding Executive authority and have been subject to legal proceedings even at various times throughout U.S. history concerning the legal validity or justification behind an order’s issuance.
When the President declairs Martial law, he is at that point becomes a Dictator, with the power to decree orders that otherwise would have to be agreed upon by the checks and balances our fore father s set in place to stop such an act. This is how President Bush was allowed to issue WAR without the approval of our Congress. I encourage you to read these E.O’s and a list of them is currently available on the White House.org web site or on wikipedia.
The most troubling order he signed is in my opinion is:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13524
Executive Order 13524 of December 16, 2009
Amending Executive Order 12425 Designating Interpol as a Public International Organization Entitled to Enjoy Certain Privileges, Exemptions, and Immunities
Social Work and the Law
NOTE: THE ARTICLE APPEARING BELOW WAS COPIED ON 22 JUNE 2009 BY http://www.cityadministrator.org/?p=397 WITHOUT MY PERMISSION AND WITHOUT CITING THIS AUTHOR. The blog is hosted by GoDaddy and registrant
Registrant Name:Joseph R Smith
Registrant Organization:FloridaView Media LLC
Baltimore City Department of Social Services v Bouknight,
488 U.S. 1301 (1988)
A three month old infant was admitted for treatment in a hospital. It became apparent that the mother, Jackie Bouknight may have maltreated the infant. Consequently, the Department of Social Services (DSS) petitioned the Court to declare the child as a “child in need of assistance” and grant it the power to put the child under foster care (Baltimore City Department of Social Services v Bouknight, 488 U.S. 1301 (1988). The Court granted relief and it was agreed upon by the parties that Bouknight shall have the custody of the child subject to the conditions of supervised parenting and an undertaking of non-infliction of bodily harm and punishment on the child. At first, Bouknight complied with the conditions but later on she became uncooperative and refused to produce her son to the DSS.
The DSS in fear for the safety and well being of the child filed a case before the Court to compel Bouknight to produce her son. She failed to appear before the Court but was later on arrested. On her refusal to disclose the whereabouts of her son, she was found guilty of contempt and was ordered to be incarcerated until compliance with the order [In re Maurice, No. 50 (Dec. 19, 1988). 314 Md. 391, 550 A.2d 1135].
On certiorari, the Court of Appeals of Maryland ruled that the incarceration of Bouknight was an infringement of her Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination. According to the Court, the production of the son is testimonial in nature because by doing so, it only proves Bouknight’s “continuing control” over her son which may be utilized in a criminal proceeding. It ruled that there are acts of production deemed to have testimonial value citing the case of U.S. vs. Doe (Baltimore City Department of Social Services v Bouknight, 488 U.S. 1301 (1988).
The U.S. Supreme Court granted the stay of DSS pending the filing of the requisite petition for certiorari. The grant of stay was based on the fact that even assuming that the act of production of the child is testimonial in character, many line of decisions of the Court are clear that as between the public need vis-à-vis a single claim of an individual on constitutional privilege, the former is upheld. In this particular case, the safety and interests of the abused child must be upheld over Bouknight’s assertion considering that, in the hierarchy of values, the safety and welfare of the child takes precedence over other concerns (Baltimore City Department of Social Services v Bouknight, 488 U.S. 1301 (1988). Moreover, the information sought which is the whereabouts of the child is for the contempt charge and therefore civil in nature (Baltimore City Department of Social Services v Bouknight, 488 U.S. 1301 (1988).
The Fifth Amendment: Right against Self-Incrimination
The Fifth Amendment originated from England and derived from the Latin maxim “nemo tenetur seipsum accusare” meaning “no man is bound to accuse himself” (Levy, 1968). It was used in both the accusatorial and inquisitorial legal systems of England (Levy, 1968).
In the U.S., after the revolution the states ratified the Constitution with the inclusion of the privilege in the bill of rights. The original version of Madison was amended by the House to include “in any criminal case” (Schwartz, 1971). Thus, as it now stands, the Fifth Amendment provides, “. . . nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself . . .” (U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights). The primary purpose of its inclusion in the Bill of Rights is “to protect the innocent and to further the search for truth” [Ullmann v. United States, 350 U.S. 422 (1956)]. However, in subsequent line of decisions, the Court ruled that other privileges stated in the bill of Rights are more in the nature of adjuncts to the determination of truth such as the right to counsel or the safeguards afforded by the Fourth Amendment while the privilege against self-incrimination is primarily for “the preservation of the accusatorial system of criminal justice” [Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 460 (1966); Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 760–765 (1966); California v. Byers, 402 U.S. 424, 448–58 (1971)]. This maintains the integrity of the judicial system and protects the privacy of the individuals from government intrusion [Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 460 (1966); Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 760–765 (1966); California v. Byers, 402 U.S. 424, 448–58 (1971)]. The privilege is a guarantee against compulsion for testimonial evidence which consequently will result in the imposition of criminal penalty on such person making testimony.
The Court laid down the requirements necessary before a party can successfully invoke the protection of the privilege against self-incrimination. In the cases of U.S. v. Doe, (465 U.S. 605) and Doe v. U.S. [487 U.S. 201, 209 (1988)], the Court enumerated the three (3) requisites that should be present for the Fifth Amendment to apply, namely: a) “that the statement be testimonial; b) incriminating; and, c) compelled.” According to the court, ‘testimonial’ refers to all communications whether express or implied which “relate to a factual assertion or disclose information” (Ashby, J., 2006 citing Doe v. U.S., 487 U.S. 201). The statements or communications made whether verbally or in writing fall within the privilege (Ashby, J., 2006) and is not limited by the forum where it was elicited, i.e. before the court, administrative proceedings or before the law enforcement office [Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70 (1973)]. The second requirement, ‘incriminating’ refers to statements that can be used as a basis for a finding of criminal liability under a penal law or “provides a link to the chain of evidence for prosecution under a criminal statute” [United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27 (2000)]. The third requisite is the compulsion to give a statement. The Court explained that this requisite refers to “circumstances that deny the individual a free choice to admit, to deny, or to refuse to answer” (Ashby, J., 2006). Additionally, the Court ruled in the case of Fisher v. United States that these three requisites should all concur and be present so that the privilege can be successfully invoked [425 U.S. 391(1976)].
Legal and Ethical Issues and their Impact on Social Work Practice
The main legal issue in the case of Baltimore is whether the circumstances surrounding it would fall within the ambit of the privilege against self incrimination and consequently, Bouknight may successfully invoke it and prevent her from being compelled to produce or furnish the whereabouts of her son lest be incarcerated for contempt.
The Supreme Court allowed the stay of the decision of the appellate court for overturning the ruling of the juvenile court and in finding that the compulsion for Bouknight to produce her son squarely fell within the privilege and therefore ordered her release (Alderman and Kennedy, 1992). The appellate court found that the act of production is testimonial and therefore its compulsion, is a violation of the privilege. Furthermore, the interest of the government in the safety of the son cannot outweigh the observance and respect for the privilege against self incrimination as provided in the Bill of Rights (Alderman and Kennedy, 1992). In other words, the three requisites concurred, i.e. the act of production or of furnishing information as to the whereabouts of her son are incriminating and testimonial in character; and, there was also compulsion because if she failed to disclose information sought she would be incarcerated for contempt as what had happened.
The Supreme Court through Chief Justice Rehnquist predicated his discussion on three major points, namely: a) The Court of Appeals passed upon a controversy concerning the federal Constitution which logically can be properly resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court (California v. Riegler, 449 U.S. 1319); b) The act of production does not fall within the ambit of the privilege citing the cases of U.S. v. Doe, Fisher v. U.S. and Schmerber v. California. In these cases, the court ruled that the act of production of the documents is not ‘testimonial’ and therefore does not infringe upon the privilege considering that their existence and location are already known to the Government. In fact, responding to a subpoena have been considered legal and acceptable even if compulsion is present [Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976)]. Moreover, when an accused is required to furnish his handwriting sample, this had been held not to violate the privilege because it is not ‘testimonial’ but merely evidentiary United States v. Flanagan, 34 F.3d 949 [10th Cir. 1994]). The third point c) is by using the balancing of interests test or balancing the public need vis-à-vis ensuring the individual’s constitutional civil liberties, public need prevailed considering that the disclosure of information was non-criminal and not directed at a particular group as was held in the case of California v. Byers, 402 U.S. 424 (1971) where the validity of a law requiring disclosure of the name and address at the scene of a vehicular accident. Similarly in the case of New York v. Quarles where the Fifth Amendment rights have to give way to a public safety exception and therefore in the case of Bouknight, “the public safety exception to the Fifth Amendment was justified because its interest was in protecting children like Maurice, not in prosecuting” (Alderman and Kennedy, 1992).
In sum, the privilege against self-incrimination is not an absolute right. Albeit the civil liberties accorded under the Bill of Rights safeguards undue government intervention and restraint to its power, there are instances when these rights would have to give way to compelling interests of the society that would warrant Government intervention and intrusion such in the case of protecting and ensuring the safety of infants or children from physical abuse. Once it has been established that a child is abused, it becomes the duty of the State to take over and protect.
The judicial pronouncement in the case of Bouknight has a pervading and far reaching implication on social work practice. This gives the social workers a great burden and responsibility to follow up sharply abused children in foster care or those released under an order of protective supervision. Admittedly, there is an apparent lack of strict protocols in the present system of child welfare agencies (Parks, 2005). A set of guidelines must be crafted to govern exigencies of missing children from foster care like supervised visits and court orders in cases of abduction like what have occurred in Maryland with “Ariel” who had been abducted by his mother Teresa B (Parks, 2005). Guidelines should also be drawn to address the coordinated efforts both with the law enforcement and child welfare personnel.
Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California,
17 Cal.3d 425
A graduate student from India, Prosenjit Poddar went to the University of California Berkeley to study naval architecture. It was there that he met Tatiana Tarasoff. A few kisses made him believe that they have a special relationship until Tarasoff bragged about her many relationships with other men. Poddar suffered depression until he sought professional help from Dr. Moore, a psychologist of the University Health Service. He confided to the doctor that he intended to secure a gun and to kill Tarasoff. On the strength of a letter request of Dr. Moore, Poddar was taken by the campus police, however upon assurance that Poddar was reasonable he was released. Upon the return of the University Health psychiatrist from his vacation, he ordered the destruction of Dr. Moore’s letter and did not recommend any further action on Poddar’s case.
When Tarasoff returned from her vacation, she was stabbed and killed by Poddar who at that time moved in with her brother already. The parents of Tarasoff sued the Regents of the University, its health personnel namely, Gold, Moore, Powelson, Yandell and the campus police namely, Atkinson, Beall, Brownrigg, Hallernan, and Teel for “failing to warn their daughter of an impending danger” (Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 17 Cal.3d 425). At the lower court, the complaint was dismissed because there was no cause of action. According to the lower court, the defendants only had the duty to the patient and not to a third party.
The dismissal was appealed to the Appeals Court but which only sustained the dismissal. Thus, it was elevated to the Supreme Court of California. The appealed decision in so far as the university police officers, Atkinson, Beall, Brownrigg, Hallernan, and Teel finding them not liable to the plaintiffs was affirmed. However, in so far as the therapists and the Regents of the university, the appealed decision was overturned for reception of evidence in accordance with the pronouncements of the Supreme Court (Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 17 Cal.3d 425).
In fine, the complainants averred four (4) causes of action, namely: a) “Failure to detain a dangerous patient; b) failure to warn on a dangerous patient; c) abandonment of a dangerous patient; and, d) breach of primary duty to patient and the public” (Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 17 Cal.3d 425).
Anent the first and fourth causes of action, the Supreme Court ruled that the defendants cannot be held liable because of a specific provision of the Government Code or Section 856 thereof which grants immunity to public employees from any resultant damage or injury from deciding whether or not to confine a person with mental ailment. This provision is also applicable to the therapists because the law also refers to those who are capable of recommending confinement. As regards the third cause of action, the government immunity includes the “award of exemplary damages resulting from a wrongful death” and therefore, defendants cannot be held liable (Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 17 Cal.3d 425).
Anent the second cause of action, the Supreme Court found defendants therapists and Regents of the University to have failed to comply with their duty to warn Tarasoff of the peril to her life. Albeit, the therapists had no direct relations with Tarasoff, they could have reasonably foreseen the danger and threat to her life as confided by their patient, Poddar. This is the point where the law establishes the duty of care on their part to warn Tarasoff. Their failure to warn her may reasonably concluded as a proximate cause of her death. The duty of confidentiality between patient and psychotherapist and the right to privacy of the patient cannot prevail over public interest or public safety. Moreover, there are clear provisions of laws, i.e. Section 1024 of the Evidence Code and Section 9 of the Principles of Medical Ethics of the American Medical Association which allows the physician to divulge matters confided to him in confidence when it is necessary for public welfare (Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 17 Cal.3d 425).
Confidentiality
The effective therapeutic relationship between physician/psychiatrist and patient rests largely on trust that matters confided by the patient during the treatment are kept in strictest confidence by the physician/psychiatrist. It is the ethical duty of the physician to observe privacy and confidentiality of his patients (Corbin, 2007). While it is also of public interest to ensure that treatment of those who are mentally ill by maintaining an atmosphere whereby they can have an open dialogue with their therapist and of safeguarding its confidential character; the same public interest calls for an imperative recognition of instances whereby disclosure of the confidential communications be revealed and be made to safeguard public safety and avert the threatened peril. In the instances, where the public safety is at risk, the therapist must disclose confidential information discreetly with due regard to protecting the privacy of his patient (Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 17 Cal.3d 425).
The parameters of confidentiality are defined by law and by the ethical code of conduct for practitioners in the territorial jurisdiction. In the case of Tarasoff, the Evidence Code and the Principles of Medical Ethics of the American Medical Association provided specific and limited exceptions under which the confidentiality privilege can be breached, i.e. “if the psychotherapist has reasonable cause to believe that the patient is in such mental or emotional condition as to be dangerous to himself or to the person or property of another and that disclosure of the communication is necessary to prevent the threatened danger; unless he is required to do so by law or unless it becomes necessary in order to protect the welfare of the individual or of the community” (Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 17 Cal.3d 425).
It would be wise for the practitioners to familiarize themselves of the limits of confidentiality as provided under the laws considering that it may differ from state to state. The Tarasoff case provided a basis to guide a practitioner in his professional dealings relative to the duty to warn others in cases of a specific threat of harm by his patient against others/another. Subsequent cases followed the consistent pattern of the jurisprudence laid down by the Supreme Court. In the case of David v. Lhim (1983), the plaintiff-administrator of the estate sued the psychiatrist who treated the son who killed his mother after he was released from the hospital. There was failure on the part of the psychiatrist who treated the son to warn the mother of the potential danger after her son confided his intentions of killing her (Corbin, 2007). In another case, Chrite v. U.S. (2003), the Veterans Administration was held liable for having failed to warn the intended victim of a patient of a threatened harm. Subsequent rulings of the court clarified and defined what constituted ‘threat’ as “imminent threat of serious danger to a readily identifiable victim” and “specific” (Corbin, 2007).
When there are no specific provisions of the law, Dickson (1998) proposes that the therapist/practitioner may be protected against lawsuits if he would consult and keenly document the case of the patient or comply with the “mandated reporting guidelines” required by some states. Reamer (2003) on the other hand, suggests that the therapist must have evidence that the patient is a threat to the safety of another; evidence of that the threat can be foreseen; threat is imminent and that the potential victim is identifiable.
Legal and Ethical Implications and their Impact on Social Work Practice
The duty of reasonable care to assist others in danger is a legal duty as well as a moral duty. However, American negligence law only recognizes it as a moral duty except when there exists a relationship between parties. In the case of Tarasoff, no special relationship existed between the therapist and Tarasoff; however the court has made an exception to this general rule (Bickel, 2001). It declared that the therapist has the duty to care and to warn Tarasoff of the imminent harm on her life. This also includes the duty to control the conduct of his patient, Poddar. In the same breath, a doctor has the duty to warn his patient if he has a contagious disease (Saltzman and Furman, 1999).
There is an affirmative duty for the therapist to advise and warn Tarasoff of the threat to her life although this meant breach of confidentiality with his patient Poddar. This finds basis both legally and ethically considering that the law and the code of ethics for doctors have recognized and provided specifically that doctors are bound to disclose relevant facts to others even if this violates confidentiality with their patients provided they are required by law or if it is required for public safety (Saltzman and Furman, 1999). This legal duty to warn applies when the threat is specific and imminent and where the victim is “readily identifiable” (Bickel, 2001). The courts also have recognized the difficulty in assessing and predicting circumstances that may lead to harm or violence and consequently, adhered to the ‘professional judgment rule’ whereby the therapist is not held liable for errors of judgments. Liability attaches only upon showing that the conduct of the therapist was not in accordance with the “accepted professional standards” (Bickel, 2001).
There is an ambivalence that was created by the Tarasoff protective disclosure ruling with the practitioners (Kachigian and Felthous, 2004). Analogous cases and protective disclosure statutes in the different states were analyzed and it was discovered that there are no clear defined parameters of these duties. The therapist is required to a certain way betray his patient by disclosing matters which are protected by confidentiality. Considering the uncertainty brought about by the legal doctrine and court decisions, the undesirable consequence of which was deterrence for therapists to accept “treatment potentially violent patients” (Merton, 1982). Moreover, therapists are more inclined to have their patients committed in an institution so that threats to the safety of potential victims can be averted.
The Tarasoff protective disclosure was even extended recently to include even “communications made from a patient’s family member” as pronounced by the Court in the case of Ewing v. Goldstein (May and Ohlschlager, 2008). The dubious jurisprudential precedents by the courts in interpreting the protective disclosure statutes or its resort to common law instead of interpreting the statute left a vacuum in the definition of the duty to protect (Kachigian and Felthous, 2004). As a result, “clinicians must continue to rely on their clinical and ethical judgment, rather than statutory guidance, when considering potential protective disclosures or future drafts of protective disclosure statutes” (Kachigian and Felthous, 2004).
References
Alderman, E. and Kennedy, C. (1992). In our defense: the bill of rights in action. First Avon
Books edition.
Ashby, J. (February 2006). Note declining to state a name in consideration of the fifth amendment’s self-incrimination clause and law enforcement databases after Hiibel. Michigan Law Review, No. 4, Vol. 104:779.
Baltimore City Department of Social Services v Bouknight, 488 U.S. 1301 (1988).
Bickel, R. Revisiting Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California: the scope of the psychotherapist’s duty to control dangerous students. Presented before the 22nd Annual Law and higher Education conference in Clearwater, Florida on 18-20 February 2001.
California v. Byers, 402 U.S. 424, 448–58 (1971).
Corbin, J. (Fall 2007). Confidentiality and the duty to warn: Ethical and legal implications for the therapeutic relationship. The New Social Worker, Vol. 14, No. 4.
Dickson, D. T. (1998). Confidentiality and privacy in social work. New York: The Free Press
Doe v. U.S., 487 U.S. 201, 209 (1988).
Fisher v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976).
Kachigian, C. and Felthous, A. (September 2004). Court responses to Tarasoff statutes. Journal
of American Academy of Psychiatry and Law Online, Vol. 23:263-273.
Levy, L. (1968). Origins of the fifth amendment: The right against self-incrimination.
May, S. and Ohlschlager, J. (2008). California alert! Tarasoff ruling expanded for clients who ‘go off.’ ECounseling. American Association of Christian Counselors.
Merton, V. (1982). Confidentiality and the dangerous patient: Implications of Tarasoff for Psychiatrists and lawyers. Emory Law Journal, Vol. 31:265.
New York v. Quarles, 476 U.S. 649 (1984).
Parks, A. (2008). Unless the Court of Appeals decision is reversed, MD children may not be. Daily Record The Baltimore.
Reamer, F. (2003). Social work malpractice and liability. New York: Columbia University Press, 2nd ed.
Saltzman, A. and Furman, D. (1999). Law in social work practice. Brooks Cole, 2nd edition.
Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966).
Schwartz, B (December 1971). The bill of rights: A documentary history. Chelsea House Publishers with McGraw-Hill Education.
Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 17 Cal.3d 425.
Ullmann v. United States, 350 U.S. 422 (1956).
U.S. v. Doe, 465 U.S. 605.
United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27 (2000).
E.Writers
http://www.articlesbase.com/education-articles/social-work-and-the-law-756045.html
Alex Jones Prison Planet TV 3 of 3
HOT NEW WEBSITE http:/www.resistnwo@37.com
Watch The Fall Of The Republic At:hot new website http:/www.resistnwo@37.com
http://www.veoh.com/group/Defenders-OF-Lliberty#watch%3Dv…
Also http://www.veoh.com/group/the-land-that-i-love
Duration : 0:6:18
How can I go about talking about fear to corruption in our government?
I’m presenting a poster with a group for my US Gov class tomorrow and one person is going to talk about fear (war) and then he wants me to make like a transition to corruption.
What could I say? How could I connect fear to corruption?
I think people become more vulnerable to corruption when they are in fear.
When Children Become Victims of Poverty and Ignorance
The ‘plights of the Akwa Ibom Children’, as the Punch Newspapers editorial of 15 January, 2009 described the madness in the name of child-witches hunting and exorcising going on in the state, need the attention of every rational being on the surface of the earth. For as Guardian Newspapers editorial of December 21, 2008 suggested, it is nothing but a ‘debacle on Child Rights’, a situation that have taken away self-esteem and psychologically demean many children in the state to the extent that they are far too conscious of every of their daily acts everywhere and anywhere for the fear of being tagged witches or wizards. This is totally unacceptable. Hence the question: who is a witch?
Witchcraft, according to Bertrand Russell, is ‘a composite phenomenon drawing from folklore, sorcery, demonology, heresy and Christian theology’. The World Book Encyclopedia describes it as ‘the use of supposed magic powers generally to harm or damage property”. From these two definitions, we can move on to deduce a definition of a ‘witch’ as a person who is supposed to have received such powers from ‘evil spirits’, that is, power to know all things, power to destroy lives, among others. While ‘witch’ is a general name, the word has a gender connotation. A ‘male witch’ is called wizard, while a ‘female witch’ is called ‘witch’.
The belief in witchcraft is not recent, nor is it a product of the popular Harry Porter series. Rather, according to Godffrey Parrinder, it is “one of the great (sic) fears from which mankind has suffered”. The belief has appeared in many parts of the world, in one form or the other. While it became particularly prominent and developed in Europe in the later middles ages and renaissance periods, the belief in witches and their evil powers have remained with Africans for centuries before then. For Africa, therefore, till today, witchcraft belief is a great tyranny spreading panic and death. This unhindered, thriving, belief, which is devoid of any commonsensical scientific ratiocination, is being buoyed by the excruciating and pitiable living condition of many Africans that they found unexplainable; hence the need for scapegoats, the ‘witches’. Thanks to the modern day fraudsters, the Pentecostal pastors.
The advent of Pentecostalism, and the healing Christian, churches have contributed in no small measure in reinforcing the belief. They accepted the existence of witches and witchcraft and claimed they have the power to protect against its evil powers. All manner of social, health and economic problems are readily carpeted as having ‘spiritual’ dimension blamable on ‘witches’, who are usually aged women and unwitting teenagers. To market their churches, most of these pastors have now resorted to demonizing innocent children, as witches that must be ‘delivered’ and ‘saved’ from the power of darkness. This uncritical scapegoating is gaining momentum more than ever before because of the seemingly irredeemable economic condition of living of sub-Saharan Africans. The many frustrated sub-Saharan African people are brainwashed to believe that their major enemies are not corrupt government officials, inhuman government policies nor their, personal, inability to cultivate and explore the best of their potentials in the ‘here and now’ world. Rather they have been sweet-tongued into believing that it is the ‘witches’ in their families and their homes that have been working against their fortune spiritually. Based on the ‘prophesies’, the unfortunate scapegoats, those accused of being witches, are given two options: either to confess to their ‘countless heinous sins’ and be saved/delivered after severe beatings or risk being killed, which in most cases mean being stoned to death.
In the Akwa-Ibom situation, confession is often preferred. Why? The ‘Prophets’ and ‘Bishops’ of God must eat! All you need to imagine is a steady ten thousand naira, N10,000, minimum income, almost every other day for tagging an unfortunate child a witch. Let’s not forget that some pastors like Bishop Sunday Ulup-Aya charge as much as between N30,000, thirty thousand, and N400,000, four hundred thousand, naira for their services. But how, for instance, can one be sure that these children are witches, as these prophets claim, and not mere victims of the poverty ravaging the material and psychological fabric of their families and that of the prophets?
To answer this question, we took a field trip to the affected towns and villages early last month. The product of the ‘expedition’ as friends have retorted to calling it, is revealing. Our very first respondent in Eket, Mr. Edet claimed to have participated in “dealing with not less than 7 ‘confirmed’ child witches”, one of which was burnt by the mob beyond recognition.
“Who confirmed them as witches?” we inquired.
“Our pastor is a man of God and when he prayed, the Holy Spirit arrested the children”.
“Is it the holy spirit that pushed them to the front of the congregation to confess?”
“Sometimes, they cried of fire burning all over their bodies and sometimes, to be sincere, the look on the faces of members of the congregation is enough to push them to the front”
We then asked the question that pissed him really, really off:
“Don’t you think these allegations are fictitious and merely being fabricated by pastors to make some money and lure people to come to church for protection?”
Silently, I wished we never asked the question.
“You are possessed! Are you saying my pastor is a liar? Who you be sef? (meaning who are you?).I see that the devil is really disturbing you like that stupid Sam Ikpe (referring to the Director of CRARN, Child Rights and Rehabilitation Network, where some of the alleged child witches live). Now get off my bike!!”
With that last sentence, I need not tell you his profession. Well, Mr. Edet is a professional motorbike transport operator; he takes people from one location to another on his bike for a fee. He is married with four children and lives in a two-room apartment, shared toilet, shared kitchen. His average income is a bit over $5 per day, but about $4 sometimes. After Edet, we had some other interviews at the bar, at the market (buying what we don’t really need sometimes only to give them to other respondents), at a popular burukutu (local beer) joint, in canteens and church environs.
What is glaring from all the responses to our questions is that there seems to be element of aggression and frustration, which is being vented on these innocent children. The belief in witchcraft has stunted the growth of unchained creativity and made many Akwa-Ibomites to recoil unnecessarily to fate, visiting only pastors, Alfas (the Muslim witchdoctors) and the the traditional witchdoctors to ward off and cleanse themselves of the ‘curses or family jinx’ trailing them. Lean income, rather than been spent wisely are given to these modern day ‘fraudsters’ who ride in big cars for the spiritual ‘protections services’ they provided. In some cases, micro-finance loans, and financial compensations provided by the oil companies like Mobil Oil Unlimited, have been used in funding ‘witchcraft cleansing rituals’ rather than the small scale business that it was disbursed for. Some even ‘swore by the their fathers, grandfathers and great, great grandfathers’ that they will kill any child witch found in their families. Pathetic, enh?
So, what is the fate of these children? We sought audience with handful of local officials in charge of child welfare in Eket, Esit Eket and Ibeno local government areas and the youth council officials in Eket Zone. Specifically, we met the General Secretary of the Eket Youth Council, who also doubles as the Chairman of the Ibeno Youth Council, Mr. Ebong Edem and some of his executive members.
The local social workers opined that although they are convinced that these children are witches, yet as their duties demands, they are willing to help them, most especially in providing psychological counseling and rehabilitation, mostly biblically colored, for them. It was as if they have all rehearsed the same statement for ‘journalists’ (what we claimed to be). What is baffling is: how can a child, someone less than ten years old, think of seking ‘psychological counseling’? That to us is complete bullshit!! Why not offer the counseling to their parents and friends, we thought. Those are the people that need counseling. The representatives of the youths that we spoke with exhume hope and skepticism yet they can’t voice them. One sure fact, however, is that they are willing to do something about it.
That is exactly the kind of spirit that we need in our attempt to clear the slur on our image and stall the attempt to regress us back into the European middle ages. The people, as we observe, need to be enlightened on the provisions of the Child Rights Act, although ignorance of the law is not an excuse. The Akwa-Ibom State Ministry of Information needs to run campaigns that will inform and educate Akwa-Ibomites on the provisions of the Child Rights Act, passed by the Akwa Ibom state House of Assembly and signed by Governor Akpabio, which criminalise childwitch hunting and stigmatizing. The provision that deals with this reads: anyone caught or suspected to be involved in any form of torture, trial by ordeal or inhuman treatment of a child, purportedly to cure, purge or exorcise such a child of witchcraft would be liable to 10 years imprisonment without an option of fine. This to us is a precious and timely addition to subsisting Section 207 of the nation’s Criminal Code Act Cap 38(2004) which criminalize any trial by ordeal and Section 208 which stipulates that any person who directs, controls or presides at any trial by ordeal which is unlawful, “is guilty of a felony” and is liable on conviction to severe punishment.
Obviously, these children are mere victims of poverty ravaging the country and the inactivity of the state ministry concerned in dutifully informing the populace even when a very proactive measure have been taken by the Governor. We are, therefore, duty-bound as responsible global citizens to, by all moral means, assist in freeing these children from the shackles and bondages of poverty and ignorance they have been conditioned to live. We can do it!
Onward!
‘Yemi Ademowo Johnson, socio-political philosopher and applied anthropologist, is Editor, YouthSpeak!, Belgium, and International Coordinator, HAWK-Africa Project.
Yemi Ademowo Johnson
http://www.articlesbase.com/causes-and-organizations-articles/when-children-become-victims-of-poverty-and-ignorance-756041.html