…while some carriers have decided to press on with developing their data business since former U.S. National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden's disclosures, others have started pitching themselves as their customers' best allies in seeking to hide from any prying eyes. Verizon's Precision Marketing Insights product, which offers businesses statistics about mobile users in a given area, was in commercial trials with sports teams and billboard owners when the Snowden allegations hit. After fresh debate by top management and the board on whether selling even anonymous data on customers was a good move, the company decided to go ahead with it, said Colson Hillier, a Verizon executive. "Privacy is a hot button issue right now, but we think we can take a leadership stance," Hillier said. "It's not a reputational risk if you do it right and are pro-active in communication with consumers and policy makers." Other telecom companies took the opposite tack, casting themselves as better guardians of customer data than internet companies like Google, which use it to target advertising. Deutsche Telekom, for example, last year launched an encrypted "Email made in Germany" service and a secure communications link for small businesses to ward off hackers or spooks. "Protection of the private sphere is a valuable commodity," its CEO said.
Telecom firms mine for gold in big data despite privacy concerns | Reuters


Tekken 7 Review – Intricate and Robust Fighter Doesn't Disappoint
Judi Azmand
Tekken 7 Review
Tekken is a fighting game franchise that's been around for quite some time. With its first installment back in 1994, it's been around for more than 20 years and is home to one of the most diverse cast of characters and peculiar stories. With nearly every game revolving around the King of Iron Fist Tournament held by the Mishima Zaibatsu Corporation, it invites fighters from around the world to battle it out and show their skills. Tekken 7 keeps the same premise but has a darker-than-usual twist for the conclusion of the Mishima clan saga. With a 5 year gap from the previous Tekken installment, is Tekken 7 worth the wait?
Tekken 7 has three main modes to feed your fighting game desires. First is Story Mode where the storytelling is split into two sections – one that follows the entire Mishima Saga including events from previous installments, and the other highlighting specific characters not directly related to the story. Since there isn't a dedicated Tutorial Mode, the Story Mode also sparsely gives guidance on how to use certain buttons and initiate certain moves, but really doesn't do much justice. You play a handful of different characters as you progress through the chapters allowing you to get a feel for the unique fighting styles and learn about the various characters within the Tekken universe. There are over 30 characters to try out and get a hang of – some long-running returning characters and others completely brand-new.
Overall, while the story has its flaws and weird moments, it's enjoyable and highly entertaining. Sure, characters talk to one another in different languages, there are random unnecessary fights, and events that are so absurd they make you laugh, but it's what makes Tekken 7 part of the Tekken franchise and exactly what it's known for. It's not often you get a grandfather, father, son, and grandson throwing each other off cliffs and into volcano pits to be in charge of a company running an international fighting tournament. Even more so, it's a rather suitable entry point for newcomers to learn about Tekken's lore without feeling overwhelmed.
The second is Offline Mode that includes Arcade, Treasure Battle, local versus, and practice. Arcade is your straightforward run-through of a handful of stages with a final boss to conquer and see the credits role. Meanwhile, Treasure Battle is where you'll spend a good chunk of time surviving battle after battle to obtain as much fight money and items as possible for customization. Certain fights along the way are chosen to have additional perks or altered settings to keep it exciting – like Turbo Mode for instance. Other than that, local versus is where you'll duke it out with a friend locally and practice is where you'll most likely be staring at the list of moves you wish you could master.
Third is Online Mode that houses tournaments, ranked matches, and lobby rooms for you to fight fellow Tekken players you've never met before or a friend, not in arm's reach. While Offline Mode is easy to get sucked into, Online Mode is a whole other experience where you can really test out your skills and meet the Tekken community. Whether you want to get highly competitive or just chillax and find a worthy opponent, it's all at your disposal. Syncing matches takes a while at times, but the stability of the servers and smoothness of battles have been extremely impressive so far.
"Tekken 7 continues to provide its intricate and robust fighting mechanics to consoles by having the Tekken formula balance itself between just enough of the same and also the new for returning fans of the franchise to appreciate without feeling underwhelmed"
Aside from actually getting physical in fights, there's Customization Mode and Jukebox Mode. You can customize every single Tekken 7 character nearly any way you like – their hair, clothes, accessories, and even avatar or special effects. In addition, you can edit the design of your health bar, title plate, and information panel to your heart's desire. You also have the ability to listen and create a playlist of all your favourite songs throughout the Tekken games. The flexibility to edit characters' appearance as well as the interface to make it unique and your very own is always an awesome feeling.
The nitty gritty elements of Tekken 7 reside in the fighting mechanics and what happens in battles. Tekken has been known for its more technical and robust build that doesn't necessarily push button mashers away, but has a level of intricacy to it that needs to be harnessed to get anywhere. You've got your basic punches and kicks both aimed amongst high, mid, and low areas of the body as well as throws, guards, and counters. Item moves make a return in which equipped items are incorporated into battles and utilized. Stage Effects are also carried over where the floor or walls can break and characters bounce off the environment.
A change and new feature to the Tekken formula is the dual function of Rage Mode and inclusion of Power Crushers. Once your health lands in the red zone and Rage Mode is activated, you have the ability to use either Rage Arts a 'super move' with a nifty animation that knocks out around 30% of health, or Rage Drives that can be incorporated into combos dealing tons of damage if executed correctly. Usage of either move will deplete the amount of rage you have so choosing wisely is key. Power Crushers, on the other hand, are moves that do not stop even if you get hit by absorbing the damage from mid or high attacks. In addition, Interactive Cutscenes debut in Tekken 7 in which the camera pans to where the finishing blow will occur and slows down the fight for even more suspense and intensity.
The fighting mechanics and their features in Tekken 7 are well-incorporated and feel far from awkward or unfitting. If anything, the inclusion of Rage Arts and Interactive Cutscenes make Tekken 7 more appealing to the eye, interactive, and on-par to other fighting games currently out in the market. Like past Tekken installments, it's hard not feel powerful and mighty when in a battle as Tekken 7 continues its unique quirks and charms.
Tekken 7 uses Unreal Engine 4 nicely bringing the Tekken 7 characters and world to life. Each character dawns their outfit proudly with the various colours and details associated with them while the stages have various times of day and weather conditions making for enjoyable and memorable fights. It also helps that the animations are extremely smooth and fluid making fights intense and adrenaline-filled. While some characters look a bit off at times compared to other characters, Tekken 7 still does a superb job in maintaining its overall visual quality. Cutscenes in Story Mode also transition straight into fights without any loading time successfully maintaining an engaging experience.
"Tekken 7 is a worthy fighting game that anyone can pick up and play, but also further perfect on a highly technical level when desired"
If you're in need of some beats to jam out to the Jukebox Mode is filled with tracks that'll keep your head bobbing for hours. Sound effects inevitably make every land of a punch or kick overly satisfying. Voice acting has always been impressive in the Tekken franchise and there's definitely an abundance of languages being spoken again this time around and truly plays into the authenticity of the characters.
Tekken 7 continues to provide its intricate and robust fighting mechanics to consoles by having the Tekken formula balance itself between just enough of the same and also the new for returning fans of the franchise to appreciate without feeling underwhelmed. Newcomers to Tekken may find the learning curve to be a tad bit high and accessibility to resources lacking, but self-driven investigation on combos as well as tips and tricks is all part of the fun. It's also a surprisingly suitable entry point for newcomers to learn about the Tekken universe and returning fans to have a recap. Tekken 7 is a worthy fighting game that anyone can pick up and play, but also further perfect on a highly technical level. With such a diverse cast, rewarding fighting mechanics, and tons of customization to spend countless hours on, Tekken 7 is a must-have for anyone craving a new fighting game to add to their collection.
*** PS4 code provided by the publisher ***
Great looking visuals
Tons of awesome music
Accessible for newbies
Admirable and diverse cast
Endless customization
Lack of a tutorial mode
Fairly heavy on self-research
Developer: Bandai Namco
Publisher: Bandai Namco
Tekken 7 and Frostpunk Joining Game Pass
Bandai Namco Revealing The Idolmaster Game Soon
6 Different One Piece: Pirate Warriors 4 Trailers Board Our Vessel
Digimon Survive Screenshots Released
Xenosaga Remasters Considered by Bandai Namco
Next Hover: Revolt of Gamers Review – The Boring Grind
Previous Wonder Woman Spoiler-Free Review – It Has Action, Heart and Serious Flaws


Frieden in Mosambik 1992-2017
Das Bild der Friede von Mosambik
Senegal (Casamance)
Gesundheitsdiplomatie zur Bekämpfung von AIDS
Humanitäre Diplomatie gegen die Todesstrafe
ECUMENISM -INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE
Schools of Peace
LES ECOLES DE LA PAIX EN EUROPE
LES ECOLES DE LA PAIX EN AFRIQUE
LES ECOLES DE LA PAIX EN AMERIQUE LATINE
LES ECOLES DE LA PAIX EN ASIE
THE COUNTRY OF THE RAINBOW
YOUTH FOR PEACE
LONG LIVE ELDERLY
CO-HOUSING
ELDERLY IN NURSING HOMES
SCHOOL OF LANGUAGE AND CULTURE
PEACE PEOPLE
HUMANITARIAN CORRIDORS
ROMA PEOPLE
ART AND DISABILITY
JOB AND DISABILITY
DISABILITY AND GOSPEL
THE RESTAURANT 'GLI AMICI'
MEALS ON THE ROAD
REMEMBERING MODESTA
VISITING PEOPLE IN JAIL
ECO-SOLIDARITY
Spielzeugmarkt
Ökosolidarisches Geschäft in Rom
SOLIDARITY - EMERGENCIES
SAINT GILLES: THE CHURCH, THE SAINT
GET INVOLVED (VOLUNTEERING)
WRITING TO SOMEONE ON DEATH ROW
COLLECT AND RECYCLE
FREE THE PRISONERS
SOCIAL AND APP
NEWS/STORIES
DOCUMENTS/DOSSIER
HOMILIES PREACHED AT SANT'EGIDIO
HOME > THE COMMUNITY > PRAYER > EVERYDAY PRAYER
Prayer for the unity of Christians. Particular memory of the Christian communities in Africa.
I am the good shepherd,
my sheep listen to my voice,
and they become
one flock and one fold.
1 Samuel 18,6-9; 19,1-7
On their return, when David was coming back from killing the Philistine, the women came out of all the towns of Israel singing and dancing to meet King Saul, with tambourines, sistrums and cries of joy; and as they danced the women sang: Saul has killed his thousands, and David his tens of thousands. Saul was very angry; the incident displeased him. 'They have given David the tens of thousands,' he said, 'but me only the thousands; what more can he have, except the throne?' And Saul watched David jealously from that day onwards. Saul let his son Jonathan and all his servants know of his intention to kill David. But Jonathan, Saul's son, held David in great affection; and Jonathan warned David, 'My father Saul is looking for a way to kill you, so be on your guard tomorrow morning; go into hiding, stay out of sight. I shall go out and keep my father company in the countryside where you will be, and shall talk to my father about you; I shall see what the situation is and then tell you.' Jonathan spoke highly of David to Saul his father and said, 'The king should not harm his servant David; far from harming you, what he has done has been greatly to your advantage. He took his life in his hands, he killed the Philistine, and Yahweh brought about a great victory for all Israel. You saw for yourself. How pleased you were! Why then sin against innocent blood by killing David for no reason?' Saul was impressed by Jonathan's words. Saul swore, 'As Yahweh lives, I will not kill him.' Jonathan called David and told him all this. Jonathan then brought him to Saul, and David remained in attendance as before.
I give you a new commandment,
that you love one another.
The text opens with one of the most beautiful descriptions of friendship found in the Bible, the one between David and Jonathan. From their first meeting the two feel immediately "connected" to each other for life. Their friendship reaches a level where they identify with one another. This is the meaning of the "covenant" established between them. Jonathan giving his clothes and armour to David is demonstrating more than just a generous act on the part of a prince toward the young pastor who has neither clothes appropriate for the court nor armour suitable for battle. Jonathan recognizes himself in David in an everlasting bond. Saul also delights in David for his success in the military missions he continues to give to him. The young leader's fame grows increasingly larger. Saul feels jealous and begins to suspect that David could be a threat; he thinks that the young man may dethrone him. Saul, however, needs David because he is the only one who helps him in his illness. But jealousy gnaws at him and has the idea to kill David while he plays to alleviate his pain. Subsequently, he sends David on more dangerous missions that result only in bringing David more success, in gaining more favour from the people. By now, Saul is convinced that David is an intolerable threat. If earlier he wanted to try to eliminate him discreetly, now he wants to do it openly. He shares his intention in confidence with his son Jonathan, who "took great delight" in David (v. 1). But Jonathan, because of his love for David, tells him what his father plans to do and urges him to go off to a secluded place. He then intercedes on David's behalf to Saul, saying that he is not only bold and brave, but has acted in good faith towards him. Saul, for the moment, allows himself to be convinced and promises that he will not kill David (v. 6), who is then reinstated in the court (v. 7). David then wins another battle against the Philistines (v. 8), but Saul burns with envy instead of rejoicing. By now the king's heart is completely consumed by murderous instincts. He decides to kill David the following morning when he comes out of his house. David's wife, Michal, knowing the king's intentions, let David down out the window so he could escape. Through Jonathan's friendship, God stops Saul's every attempt to carry out his plans.
Calendar of the week
click to read the privacy policy
>> register another address
This site uses cookies to improve your experience on the portal.
Ok understood!
Do not show anymore.


BVE Insights Video: The Power of Music and Storytelling
14 Mar 2018 BVE Insights
| YES
| Recommended
Video: The Power of Music and Storytelling
"There's nothing like music that has the ability to create big emotions and unforgettable experiences"
Each year we like to programme into the seminar content something a little different to what people are used to seeing at BVE. This year, with our new seminar structure we were able to look at a little bit more of the creative outputs of the UK media and entertainment industry by creating our main stage – The Storytellers Stage.
This gave us the freedom to really explore and have fun in featuring some of the best projects of 2017 and hopefully inspire a few people with the creativity and technology that is being developed. It also gave us the chance to explore something that we haven't looked at before, the creative impact of audio and music. Not just from a practical 'this is how you get the best results', but its impact on storytelling and its ability to amplify emotional connections with their audiences.
Perhaps one of the content surprises for the BVE audience this year, and as head of content one of my favourite sessions, was "Cannes Curated: Finding inspiration - brands and storytelling" hosted by Olivier Robert-Murphy, Global Head of New Business for the Universal Music Group, and Carsten Elmose, Senior Vice President and Head of Marketing for YouSee, Denmarks largest Telco.
You may wonder – why are Universal Music and YouSee presenting at BVE? Well simply put, they are both brands that have become masterful at using music and creativity to enhance the storytelling in their own branded content. Apart from Olivier Robert-Murphy being an amazing speaker and having a wealth of insight and knowledge to share as to how music brands are succeeding in creative branded content campaigns, he also brought one of those brands to BVE to share even more creative insight with our audiences. Carsten gave us perhaps one of the most memorable soundbites from BVE that I doubt many would disagree with "There's nothing like music that has the ability to create big emotions and unforgettable experiences".
When we consider the power of music and audio across content, be it in broadcast content, high end drama, indie films, or branded content, the feedback we had in our BVE research was that music and audio is perhaps not given as much credit as it deserves in terms of its contribution to storytelling and its power to connect to an audience.
How can creators produce engagement pieces that pull people back to their channel, and create lasting positive sentiments and loyalty?
This fitted neatly into what was perhaps one of the key trends that we wanted to explore for 2018, how do broadcasters, production companies, content creator's, and brands create meaningful and lasting connections with their audiences? And moving on step further how can they create these connections that work to create engagement pieces that pull people back to their channel and create lasting positive sentiments and loyalty. YouSee are a fantastic example of a brand that has used technology, analytics paired with creativity and music to connect with their customers, and global audiences, in a way that we can all learn from… no matter what type of content you produce.
I am delighted that we can share this session with you, it may be one of the most entertaining and interesting things you do with 30 minutes today!
Cannnes Curated: finding inspiration - brands and storytelling
Session from 28 Feb 2018 at BVE features unique insight on:
How Universal Music and Yousee are engaging audiences using music and storytelling
How brands are using music to create emotional connections with online audiences
A look at some of the best branded content campaigns from Cannes Lions
BVE is the largest broadcast, production and media and tech exhibition in the UK attracting over 12,000 creative professionals, business leaders and tech professionals every year.
FREE TICKET
Well that's a wrap…until next year
These (Clouds) go to 11


Simplified Version of the Declaration of Rights
What is the declaration of rights?
The Constitution is the supreme law of the country that sets out how the country must be governed. The Declaration of Rights is set out in Chapter 4 of the Constitution. It sets out the rights and freedoms which the people of Zimbabwe are entitled to.
Human rights are entitlements that we have simply because we are human beings. The rights listed in the Declaration of Rights are constitutional rights and are legally protected. Laws that take away any of these rights shall not be made unless the Declaration of Rights allows for such. Any existing laws that take away any of the rights may be declared invalid. If these constitutional rights are violated, one can sue for damages or take the matter to the Constitutional Court to get justice.
The Declaration of Rights in our new Constitution has both civil and political rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights. It also provides for environmental rights. Civil and political rights are rights that a person has as a citizen. Such rights protect a person from uncalled-for abuse by government, other people or organisations. They also ensure one's ability to participate in civil and political life in their country without discrimination or repression. Examples of rights in this group are the right to life, to liberty, not to be tortured, freedom of expression, assembly and association and the right to engage in political activity. Rights in this group are called first generation rights because they were the first human rights to be recognized.
Economic, social and cultural rights relate to basic necessities of life such as right to work, shelter, food, health, education and own language. These rights are called second generation rights because they were recognised after the need for civil and political rights had been clearly established. Solidarity and group rights are also referred to as third generation rights include right to development, peace and a clean environment.
Rights, duties and responsibilities go together. Each person has the responsibility of respecting the rights of others and the duty to obey the Constitution and other laws in Zimbabwe. As such, some rights in the Declaration of Rights are limited in ways that make sure that the public interest is served and that they do not violate the rights of other people.
Download Document:
Simplified Version of the Declaration of Rights.pdf


'The otter mustn't die out twice'
The reintroduction of the otter into the Dutch landscape eight years ago seems to have been a success, but inbreeding and high mortality rates are taking their toll.
The 31 otters that were released into the weerribben in 2002 seem to be doing well, says Hugh Jansman, animal ecologist at knowledge institute Alterra. The have produced 70 to 90 young and are also being spotted beyond the weerribben with increasing frequency. 'Otters are nomadic and they get everywhere, in spite of the countless barriers', says Jansman. 'That illustrates the resilience and the opportunism of the species.' In the report The return of the otter to the delta area, Jansman argues for the introduction of new otter populations besides the small existing source population in the Wieden-Weerribben national park. This would increase the chances of being able to put this mammal - the Netherlands' largest - back on the fauna map, after the species was officially declared extinct in 1988.
A fish-eating water rat
The European otter (Lutra lutra) is found in large tracts of Europe and Asia. It lives both in fresh water and along rocky sea coasts. With its weight of up to 13 kilos and its length of almost one and a half metres, the otter is slightly lighter yet longer than the badger. Its streamlined body, webbed toes, closeable ears and watertight skins make this fish-eater a real water rat.
As things stand, there is cause for concern, however. The otter population grew spectacularly in 2007-2008, only to fall back significantly a year later. This winter, numbers of the animals actually decreased, says Jansman. The harsh winter played a role in this, but Jansman believes that the consequences of inbreeding are also revealing themselves. 'A handful of extremely dominant males fertilized all the females. Those offspring then mate with each other, and as a result the genetic variation is halved.'
Over the next few years, the ecologist hopes to obtain more insight into the effects of inbreeding. The introduction of fresh genetic material from newly released animals is a must, says the researcher, who argues for the release of new otters on a small scale in places including the Gelderse Poort, where there is room for a fair-sized population, the Vechtplassen, and possibly in the longer term the river area of central Limburg.
Traffic victims
Another problem besides inbreeding is the high mortality rate. The heavy traffic on Dutch roads poses a serious threat to the otter's survival. The otter is no match for a tonne of steel that approaches almost soundlessly at a hundred kilometers an hour over 'quiet asphalt'. This makes traffic cause of death number one for the otter. 'About 80 percent of otter deaths can be directly put down to the traffic', estimates Jansman. Another 15 percent are due to otters meeting an untimely end by swimming into a hoop net and drowning.
Jansman sees solutions for these threats. He thinks the traffic danger could be reduced by relatively simple measures. 'We know the otters' main migration routes. Wherever a route crosses a busy road, you can take specific precautions', he claims. 'Lowering the speed limit from 80 to 60 kilometres an hour would be enough to reduce the death rate spectacularly. And then you could consider putting corrugations in the asphalt at certain places, to make the approaching cars more audible'. The death rate among otters could be further cut, says the researcher, by redesigning hoop nets so that otters cannot swim into them any more.
Hard to see but not to study
Otters are difficult to spot, but thanks to modern technology, Jansen and his colleagues have been able to learn a lot about Dutch otters. Their droppings contain a certain small percentage of intestinal wall cells which contain DNA that can, with the help of technology, be extracted and analysed. Because each animal has a unique DNA profile, researchers can not only identify individual animals, but also analyse their parentage and the genetic variation in a population. Like this, you can learn a lot about the otter population without ever clapping eyes on an otter. The population introduced into the Netherlands is therefore the best-researched otter population in Europe.
Model country
Alongside releasing more otters and taking steps to reduce the death rate, Jansman also argues for a systematic improvement to the otter's habitat. That need not cost a fortune, he thinks. 'The otter doesn't need much. What it takes is patches of shrubs or 'wilderness' along waterways, which the otter can use as resting places during the day. And every 5 to 10 kilometres there should be a larger natural area where the animals can reproduce.'
In spite of all the problems and sticking points, Jansman is optimistic about the otter's chances. 'I am convinced that in 20 years' time the otter will once again occupy most of its original habitats in the Netherlands', he asserts. 'But this is a critical phase. We have to watch out that the otter doesn't die out for the second time due to genetic impoverishment.'
What this would take, says Jansman, is financing for monitoring the population, for example. At present there are no funds for this. And that is a pity, says Jansman. 'A project such as this generates a lot of unique knowledge that can be applied elsewhere as well. The problems China is having with the conservation of the panda and the tiger are really no different to what we come up against in the conservation of the otter: the fragmentation of its habitat and inbreeding. With the otter research, the Netherlands can profile itself as a model country for the maintenance of sustainable populations in a strongly human-dominated context.'
Please insert the sum of these numbers (use numbers): five + six = *


Tag Archives: pollack
Boxing Thoughts on an Eventful Summer
By Adam J. Pollack
Manny Pacquiao vs. Jeff Horn. It is sad that all of the outrage about the alleged robbery actually robs Horn of the accolades that he rightfully deserves. That was a close fight, not a robbery, and Horn fought the perfect fight. Overall, he dictated and was more in control of matters than Pacquiao. Horn had awkward head movement, in-and-out side-to-side footwork, altering the tempos and rhythms of the fight, attacking ferociously, mauling and outworking Pac on the inside, pulling his head down (which Referee Mark Nelson allowed), occasionally butting, then moving and ducking again, showing his versatility. Horn fought the better fight, and had the superior generalship and energy in the contest. Except for the 9th round, Pac never could time or get a read on him, and his range was off. His energy levels overall were fairly low, and lower than they needed to be when he most needed energy late in the fight, when most thought Horn would fade from all of his work. But Horn was in great, superior shape, and Pac was not. All three judges had it for Horn unanimously.
Pacquiao did almost no fighting on the inside, but that is where he needed to work, because he was the shorter fighter with shorter arms, and often was falling short or missing from the outside owing to Horn's footwork, head movement, and superior height and reach. But Pac was getting manhandled by Horn's strength, particularly since Pac mostly tried to hold on the inside, rarely worked while there, rarely countered when close, and used a passive defense, which only encouraged Horn.
Let's face it. Pac has gone up a lot of weight divisions over his lifetime. He looked like a blown-up lightweight fighting a thickly built middleweight in there. The size disparity was quite obvious. Horn's height, reach, size and strength were big factors in the fight.
Andre Ward vs. Sergey Kovalev. First of all, due credit must be given to Ward for being one of the most courageous champions in the sport. He always has been willing to fight the best out there, and he has proven it consistently, against guys still at the top of their games, which is more than one can say for a lot of so-called champions in this sport. That alone places him at the top or near the top of the pound-for-pound list. His resume features the who's who of his division's elites, from Kessler, Abraham, Froch, Dawson, and now Kovalev, not once, but twice. Even some of the lesser-known guys he has fought, like Edwin Rodriguez and Sullivan Barrera, have been real fighters who would be tough outs for anyone but Ward.
As for the Kovalev rematch, before the fight I said that if Kovalev thinks he can just go in there and overpower Ward, and not engage in some real honest reflection about some of his mistakes in the first fight, he was doomed to lose again. Andre Ward is a very smart fighter. Regardless of his poor start in the first fight, he was the one who made the adjustments to make that fight close, whereas after Ward adjusted, Kovalev did not. It likely would be the case that Ward, having learned a great deal from the first fight, would come into the second with a better game plan. I said that if Kovalev did not work on his inside game, footwork, relaxation, punch volume and gears, he was going to lose by an even wider margin this time, though I believed it would be via decision.
In the rematch, after the first few rounds, Kovalev looked lethargic, listless, and confused. He had even less energy than in the first fight. He made no adjustments, mentally was not all there, and seemed more fatigued than the relatively slow pace would have made one think he would be. Now some of his fatigue might have been owing to the occasional low blow, which oddly enough, Referee Tony Weeks either failed to see or failed to warn Ward about. Getting hit low tends to wear you down. But we all know that if the referee does not help you, you need to help yourself. But Kovalev did very little to help himself in any way.
Conversely, Ward's defense was near perfect, he landed the cleaner crisper blows, particularly to the body, but also several solid jabs and lead rights to the chin. Kovalev clearly was hurt by the body blows, and he was affected by some solid blows to the chin. Like the first fight, after a competitive first 3 rounds, as of the 4th round, one could tell that Ward had adjusted and slightly taken over, and felt more comfortable, whereas Kovalev seemed more confused. By the middle of the fight, it certainly appeared that Ward was en route to another victory.
All that said, it doesn't change the fact that Ward landed several low blows in the 7th and 8th rounds, and the final blow which doubled over Kovalev and led referee Tony Weeks to stop the contest, was low. True, Kovalev had been hurt by a right to the chin, but he was finished with a low blow. It should not have been stopped at that point. Kovalev should have been given a recovery period and the action allowed to resume, per the unified rules. The referee deprived Kovalev the opportunity to recover from the foul blow, Ward the opportunity to win cleanly and without controversy, and the fans the benefit of their bargain.
Kovalev subsequently has issued a statement that making weight has affected his endurance, and it might be time to move up to cruiserweight. We shall see.
Perhaps the more controversial fight was on the undercard: Guillermo Rigondeaux vs. Moises Flores. Rigondeaux should have been disqualified. He clearly and flagrantly held and hit, which set up the knockout blow, which was thrown and landed after the bell rang. How in the world anyone could watch that and say Rigondeaux deserves to win by knockout is beyond me. It is a reflection of the utter lack of integrity in this sport. Sure they changed it days later to a no contest, but one has to wonder how they got it so wrong on fight night. The result that night was absolutely wrong. If you don't want to be disqualified, don't commit flagrant harm fouls. The reluctance to disqualify a name fighter for egregious breaches of the rules is in part why boxing does not have the same level of respect as a sport.
The July 15 fight card at the Forum in Los Angeles might not have the biggest names in boxing, but there are some really good match-ups that should prove entertaining.
Miguel Berchelt vs. Takashi Miura. Both guys come to fight. Junior lightweight Miura is a bit more of the unpolished tough brawler, and Berchelt a bit more of the boxer, but Berchelt also has the power to hurt as well, having scored 28 knockouts in his 31 victories. Berchelt hasn't lost a fight in over three years, his only defeat, and is coming off a KO11 victory over then undefeated Francisco Vargas. Southpaw Miura, 31-3-2, has 24 knockout victories to his credit, and is coming off a KO12 over 56-11 Miguel Roman. He has a common opponent with Berchelt, having been stopped in 9 rounds by Francisco Vargas in a fight in which both fighters were down. Naturally Berchelt is the clear favorite, but Miura is no easy out.
Joe Smith, Jr., 23-1, 19 KOs, vs. Sullivan Barrera, 19-1, 14 KOs. This might well be the best and most intriguing match-up on the card. This will be a true test for Smith. There still are a lot of question-marks surrounding him. Right or wrong, folks can find ways to explain away his recent big victories – Fonfara got caught cold, Hopkins was 50 years old, had been beaten up by Kovalev, and hadn't fought in two years. There is no doubt that Smith is a very heavy-handed puncher who probably can hurt anyone he hits. But does he have the power, skill, and condition needed to beat Barrera, a guy who went a competitive 12 rounds with Andre Ward in his only loss, and who has knockout victories over sturdy guys like Karo Murat and Vyacheslav Shabransky? That question makes this fight very intriguing. There definitely is a real aura of danger for Smith in this one.
Terence Crawford, 31-0, 22 KOs, might well be the actual best pound-for-pound fighter in the world right now, and he's fighting to become the first undisputed and undefeated champion in his weight division in quite a long time. On August 19, he will be taking on undefeated southpaw Julius Indongo, 22-0, 11 KOs, who is awkward, tall, long, and strong, and should not be underestimated. This should be a worthwhile junior welterweight matchup. Watching Crawford is like watching poetry in motion. But Indongo is the type of guy who will do whatever it takes to muck it all up and make it ugly, if he can.
Floyd Mayweather, Jr., 49-0, 26 KOs, vs. Connor McGregor, pro boxing debut, on August 26. You know, it makes me laugh and roll my eyes a little just to write that a guy with 49 pro boxing fights is fighting a guy making his pro boxing debut. It reminds me of when Floyd Patterson defended his world heavyweight championship against then pro debuting Pete Rademacher. But you know, as ridiculous as that fight was in its inception, at least Rademacher had actual boxing experience, and had won an Olympic gold medal, in boxing.
To the best of my knowledge, Connor McGregor is an MMA fighter. Sure, stand-up boxing is an element of MMA, but it isn't what the sport is. Thinking this is a real fight is like taking the best ping pong player in the world and matching him in a tennis match with Roger Federer, or vice versa. Or taking the best bicyclist and putting him on a track to run against the world's best 10,000 meter runner. At first blush, some might say 'Maybe, they are similar,' but anyone who understands the real differences between the sports understands it is more like apples and oranges than one might think. McGregor has no more chance to defeat Floyd in boxing than Floyd has to defeat McGregor in MMA.
Sure, McGregor will last some rounds, owing to the fact that Floyd is extremely careful, cautious, defensive-minded, and minimalist offensively. But don't let that fool you or give you the wrong impression about McGregor's performance. Floyd's caution is all the more reason why McGregor has almost zero chance – Floyd won't give him the opportunity to land even a lucky punch. He's going to methodically pick him apart and bust him up.
The fight is non-competitive in its inception. If folks want to buy that, and there is a market for that, then so be it. If you purchase and pay for it, all you are doing is encouraging more ridiculous fights like this to occur. Floyd is a businessman who wants to make the most money for the least risk, so if the fight earns him a lot of money, from a business perspective, one cannot fault him. It certainly is the least risk possible. It will be the easiest money he has earned in a long time, perhaps ever. But from a sporting perspective, he deserves excoriation.
Mayweather is banking on the fact that there is a market for the freak show, the side show, the curiosity. This isn't boxing as much as it is show business. This is like a circus, with promotion which will be akin to wrestlemania, and like the ringleader and circus master P.T. Barnum once said, "There is a sucker born every minute." Back in 1910, when Jack Johnson defeated James J. Jeffries, who had been the betting favorite despite not having fought in six years, one observer wrote, "We fool ourselves every day more than other people fool us." This fight is a fight to fool fools who will help fool themselves.
Perhaps some MMA folks will watch to see how well an MMA fighter can do with an elite boxer, and some boxing folks will watch to see the boxer pummel the MMA fighter. Some might liken it to Rocky. Some folks will be hoping that McGregor, like Rocky, shocks the world with his performance. But we all know what happens in real life.
Japan's world superflyweight champion Naoya Inoue, 13-0, 11 KOs, is one of the best, most talented pound-for-pound fighters in the world, but amongst the least known top fighters. He will be fighting Antonio Nieves, 17-2-2 on September 9 in California. Check him out. You are in for a real treat.
Mike Tyson's Appeals of His Rape Conviction, Revisited
To this day, debate continues regarding whether or not former world heavyweight boxing champion Mike Tyson received a fair trial which lead to his conviction for sexually assaulting Desiree Washington. Perhaps the best information regarding the debate is from the appellate court decisions themselves.
Refusal to Allow Impeaching Witnesses to Testify
In his appeal,Mike Tyson argued that the trial court erred when it refused to permit him to call as witnesses three women who came forward during the course of the trial: Carla Martin, Pam Lawrence, and R Renee Neal, all of whom would have contradicted Desiree Washington's version of events.
Martin was anticipated to testify that Martin and Lawrence were in a car parked in front of the Canterbury Hotel at approximately 1:40 a.m. on July 19, 1991, waiting for a friend, Renee Neal. While there, Martin observed a limousine pull in front of the hotel. Martin saw a man and a woman "hugging and kissing" in the backseat of the limousine (who turned out to be Tyson and Washington).Ms. Martin exclaimed to Ms. Lawrence that the two were all over each other. Martin would testify that she then observed the African-American woman with shoulder-length curly hair and Tyson, whom Martin immediately recognized, exit the backseat of the limousine and enter the hotel. As Tyson and the woman entered the hotel together, Martin saw Renee Neal, who was exiting the hotel, bump into the couple. Martin also observed that, as the couple entered the hotel, the woman "move[d] toward Mr. Tyson until their upper bodies appeared to be touching, and she appeared to put her arm in Mr. Tyson's."
Lawrence, if called as a witness, would testify that she heard Ms. Martin remark that the two people in the limousine were all over one another. Ms. Lawrence looked over and saw two persons sitting in the backseat of the limousine in close proximity to one another.
Neal's testimony would be that she "observed the man and woman [who had exited a gold limousine] holding hands as they entered the hotel."
Their testimony would have contradicted Desiree Washington's version of events, for she testified that Tyson hugged and kissed her when she first got into the limousine at her hotel, but no further physical contact occurred in the limousine thereafter, and that she walked into his hotel behind him, not arm-in-arm or holding hands.
The trial judge ruled that the witnesses had come forward too late, and that the Defendant took too long to notify the Court about their existence and intent to use them. The trial began on January 27, 1992. The witnesses came forward to the defense team on January 30, 1992. The prosecution was first notified about the witnesses on February 2, 1992.
In Tyson v. State, 619 N.E.2d 276 (Ind.App. 2 Dist., 1993), in a 2 to 1 vote, the Indiana Court of Appeals refused to reverse his conviction and grant Tyson a new trial. The Court agreed that it was clear that the anticipated testimonywould have contradicted the testimony of Washington that there was no physical contact between her and Tyson after the limousine left her hotel.
Nevertheless, as impeaching evidence, the Courtof Appeals held that the excluded testimony was cumulative. Washington was impeached on other points, including the details of the rape. For example, fellow Miss Black America pageant contestant Madeline Whittington testified that Washington told her she was going out with Tyson and stated, "This is Mike Tyson. He's got a lot of money. He's dumb. You see what Robin Givens got out of him."
Pasha Oliver, one of Washington's roommates during the pageant, testified that Washington told her Tyson restrained her during the rape by pinning her wrists together and covering her mouth with his arm or hand, and that she asked Tyson to take her home after the rape and he refused, which made her angry. Again, Washington expressly denied both of these things.
Further, there was additional testimony that Washington gave conflicting accounts of how the incidents in question occurred.
The majority noted that the dissent argued that the excluded testimony was not cumulative, but "is different in kind and character from other evidence adduced at trial." It made this statement based upon the conclusion that "the manner in which Tyson and D.W. acted toward each other shortly before the acts complained of has extreme relevance to whether or not Tyson might have reasonably believed, from all the surrounding circumstances and events, that D.W. consented even though as a factual matter she did not consent."
Yet, ultimately the Court of Appeals held that the evidence of the conduct that occurred between Tyson and Washington in the limousine before they entered the hotel and their conduct as they entered the hotel was not crucial, considering the spectrum of evidence that corroborated the determination that Tyson reasonably and honestly believed Washington would consent to sexual conduct in the future, and the spectrum of impeaching evidence that was admitted during the course of the trial, including Washington's inconsistent descriptions of the critical details of the conduct that occurred in Tyson's hotel room. Therefore, the Court of Appeals held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the testimony of Martin, Lawrence, and Neal was not vital to Tyson's defense.
Exclusion of Evidence of Desiree Washington's Prior Sexual History and Incidents With Her Parents
Tyson also argued that the State's examination of Washington, as well as its opening and closing arguments, left the jury with the impression that she was a "sexual innocent whose religious beliefs prohibited any premarital sex and who was far too naive to understand the implications of going to Tyson's hotel room in the middle of the night." Tyson cited portions of Washington's testimony which he asserted created an impression of innocence, including that she was active in her church, a doer of good deeds, and an award-winning student. He contended that the State's characterization of her during opening and closing arguments as a "kid" with "eyes this big" who put on her "jammies" before bed and who expected to go home "the same girl" after her date with Tyson further enhanced this image.
Hence, he argued that he should have been able to challenge and impeach this impression of an "angelic image" by cross-examining her about her sexual history and prior sexual conduct. However, the Court of Appeals held that Tyson's legal counsel failed to preserve the issue, even though it specifically requested to be allowed to enter such evidence into the record, and the judge refused.
Tyson further argued that the trial court erred in preventing him from referring to incidents between Washington and her parents which would have given her a motive to fabricate the rape charge. Again, the Court of Appeals held that counsel failed to preserve the issue properly, even though his counsel had requested to admit the evidence and make an offer of proof, which request was denied.
Admission of Hearsay Evidence
Tyson argued that the trial court erred by admitting into evidence an audio tape of the phone call Washington placed to 911 24 hours after he allegedly raped her. The Court of Appeals ruled that at most, it was harmless error.
Erroneous Jury Instructions
Tyson argued that the trial court should have provided the jury with several requested jury instructions, which was prejudicial to him. He wanted instructions regarding mistake of fact and reasonable belief. He argued that even if in fact Washington in her own mind was not consenting, if a reasonable person in Tyson's position mistakenly believed that she was consenting, then he could not be found guilty.
Tyson testified, "I believe that we had both made it clear earlier that day what was going to happen. … I'm sure we made it clear." Tyson testified that earlier in the day, soon after he had met Washington, he explained to her "that I wanted to fuck her," and she responded, "Sure, just give me a call." At nearly 2 a.m., he picked her up from her hotel, she went with him to his hotel, and they went into his hotel room and had sex.
He said Washington responded in a positive manner to his kissing in the limousine while riding to his hotel, and that while he was kissing her in the hotel room she was "dropping her jacket, you know, getting her jacket off quick." He also testified that he complied with Washington's request not to ejaculate in her and that he asked her to stay the night.He further testified:
Q.: Did you undress her?
A.: I did.
Q.: What happened then, Mr. Tyson?
A.: As I'm kissing her, she's moving fast. I'm kissing her. She dropping [sic] her jacket…. I'm kissing on her neck and I'm kissing her around the ears, the back of her neck, her chest, her nipples, her stomach, and I believe she had a white shirt on as well. She's trying to get that off. So I came back while she was taking it off and she had taken off those shorts–she had some shorts. She took off her shorts. I took my shirt off at the time. She had took [sic] off her underwear and the underwear dropped to her knees, and I pulled the underwears [sic] off, and then I took off–I had shorts that I had took off [sic]. I continued kissing on her body.
Q.: Then what happened?
A.: We were having oral sex a little while, and she had told me to stop, and she had told me to come up, come up. She said, "No, come up."
Q.: Meaning what?
A.: Indicating that she wanted me to insert my penis in her.
Q.: And what did you do then?
A.: She had told me not to come in her. She said, "Don't come in me, don't come in me. I'm not on the pill," and I pulled back and I ejaculated on her stomach and her leg.
Washington testified that when Tyson saw she was crying during the rape and after the two acts of criminal deviate conduct (oral and digital sex), he asked if she wanted to "get on top," to which she responded in the affirmative without "then explaining to him that she agreed to go on top only because she thought it would enable her to get away," and that she asked Tyson to, "Please put a condom on" and said, "I don't need a baby." Tyson argued that such statements would give a reasonable person the belief that she was consenting, even if she was not.
Washington's testimony on direct examination included:
A.: I walked out of the room, out of the bathroom … and then I glanced over and I saw the Defendant in his underwear….
Q.: What was your reaction?
A.: I was terrified.
Q.: What did you say?
A.: "It's time for me to leave."
Q.: Like that?
A.: Yeah.
Q.: And his response?
A.: "Come here." And he grabbed my arm, and then he was, like, "Don't fight me. Come here," and then he stuck his tongue in my mouth.
Q.: What did you do?
A.: Just pulled back…. He started saying, "Don't fight me." I tried to fight him…. It was like hitting a wall. It didn't do anything.
Q.: What did he do next?
A.: He started taking off that outer jacket that I had on. He started taking that off, and I'm like, "Get off me. Stop. Get off me," and he just kept going. Then the next thing I knew, he put me down on the bed or slammed me actually down on the bed, and he started grabbing the rest of the stuff down, and he kept kissing me and kept saying, "Don't fight me, don't fight me, relax, don't fight me."
Q.: Did you try to negotiate with him?
A.: Yeah. That was after he put his hands in me, his fingers, in my vagina.
Q.: Okay, How did he get his hand down there?
A.: He was between my legs, and he just put his fingers in there, started jamming them in really, really hard, and that's when tears started to come to my eyes, and I was, like, "Owww, please, stop."
Q.: Did you mention to him that you were worried about pregnancy?
A.: Yeah. That was–he started to pull out his penis, and he was over me, and I just freaked out and I started saying anything because I knew that hitting him and stuff wasn't going to help me. So, I just started saying anything that I could think of, like, "Please, I have a future ahead of me. Please, I have college. I can't have a baby. What are you doing?" You know, "Please put a condom on." I was just–anything to get him off of me so that I could get out of there, and he was just, like, "Well, I don't have anything and I know that you don't." I'm like, "Please, I don't need a baby. I don't need a baby." I was begging him. I was saying anything that I could say to him, and nothing worked. He was just, like, "So we'll have a baby," and he just jammed himself in me…. [H]e exposed his penis.
Q.: What did he do then?
A.: He jammed it in my vagina.
A.: I screamed out–not screamed, but I was like, "Owww," and then I just started crying and I–
Q.: Pain again?
A.: Yes.
Q.: Did you tell him you hurt?
A.: Yes…. It was just excruciating. It just hurt. He just slammed himself in me. It just felt like someone was ripping me apart. I don't know how to explain it. It just hurt.
Q.: Okay. What efforts, if any, did you make to try to get loose, to try to get away?
A.: I was trying to punch him and stuff like that. I was trying to back up. I was trying to do a lot of things. Nothing worked.
Q.: Okay. What's he doing while you're trying to do all this?
A.: He was telling me not to fight him, and then he started saying, "Don't fight me, mommy. Don't fight me," and he just kept going. He just kept slamming himself really hard.
Q.: Did you change position?
A.: At one point, he said, "Oh, you're crying," and he stopped for a second and his voice started to, like, be a little bit normal again, and then he just turned evil again, and really mean, and his eyes got all mean, and he just kept going really hard, and then he goes, like, "Well, do you want to be on top?" and I thought I could get away. So I said, "Yeah," and I was crying when I said it, and he flipped over. Then I tried to get away, and he was, like, "I told you not to fight me," and he slammed me back down again and rolled back over again.
Q.: Okay. Do you have any idea as to how long he remained inside of you?
A.: Until he was done…. Until he ejaculated.
Q.: Did you see him do that?
Q.: Tell us what he did.
A.: He pulled back and there was stuff coming out, and he said, "I told you I wouldn't come in you. Don't you love me now."
Q.: He said, "Don't you love me now?" and what was your response?
A.: I just looked at him like I was disgusted.
Tyson argued that "[a] properly instructed jury could have found (or entertained a reasonable doubt) that these exchanges could have led a reasonable person to believe that Desiree Washington consented, even if in her own mind she may not have been consenting." The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's rejection of his proposed jury instructions, holding that the facts did not merit such instructions.
Prejudicial Closing Argument
The defense argued that prosecutor Greg Garrison improperly prejudiced the jury when in closing argument he read edited portions of U.S. Supreme Court Justice White's dissenting opinion in United States v. Wade,388 U.S. 218 (1967). The portions read stated,
"Law enforcement officers have the obligation to convict the guilty and to make sure that they do not convict the innocent. They must be dedicated to making the criminal trial a procedure for the ascertainment of the true facts surrounding the commission of a crime. To this extent our so-called adversary system is not adversary at all, nor should it be. But defense counsel has no comparable obligation to ascertain or present the truth. Our system assigns him a different mission. He must be and is interested in preventing the conviction of the innocent, but absent a voluntary plea of guilty, we also insist that he defend his client whether he is innocent or guilty. The State has the obligation to present the evidence. The defense counsel needs to present nothing, even if he knows what the truth is. He need not furnish any witness to the police or reveal any confidence of his client or furnish any other information to help the prosecution's case. If he can confuse a witness, even a truthful one, or make him appear at a disadvantage, unsure, or indecisive, that will be his normal course. Our interest in not convicting the innocent permits counsel to put the State to its proof, to put the State's case in worse [sic] possible light regardless of what he thinks or knows to be the truth. In this respect, as part of our modified adversary system and as part of the duty imposed upon honorable defense counsel, we countenance or require conduct which in many instances has little, if any, relationship to the search for the truth."
The Court of Appeals held that the objection was not preserved properly, because Tyson's counsel objected only to the prosecutor reading case law in general, not the particular case.
Selection of the Judge by the Prosecutor
Tyson argued that he was denied due process because the prosecutor was able to select the trial judge who would preside over his case. He argued that the current system of assigning criminal cases to particular divisions in Marion County erroneously permits the prosecutor to determine the particular room within the criminal division to which a case is assigned, for the prosecutor knows which judge handles cases in which room. It was fundamentally unfair to allow the prosecutor to choose the judge he wanted;the inference being that a different judge might have issued different rulings throughout the trial.
On July 29, 1991, the Marion County prosecutor filed a petition requesting that a special grand jury be convened to investigate Washington's allegations against Tyson. Pursuant to Indiana law, IC 35-24-2-14 (1988), the prosecutor could file this petition with any judge in Marion County; and he chose to file it with Judge Gifford, who was presiding in Room 4 of the criminal division. In this way, the prosecutor selected the particular room and, in the absence of a valid motion for change of judge, selected Judge Patricia Gifford as the presiding judge.
The Court of Appeals ruled that because Tyson failed to show that he was prejudiced in any way by the selection of the particular room or judge, he was not deprived of his due process rights.
And yet, the Court of Appeals also said,
"However, we strongly urge the criminal division of the Marion County Superior Court to change the method by which cases are assigned to the rooms in the division. The existing system of filing cases is totally inappropriate and must be abandoned in favor of a system in which the prosecutor cannot control the assignment of a case to a particular judge. Presently, the criminal division of the Marion County Superior Court lacks the appearance of impartiality that is required to maintain the confidence of the public and the accused in the system."
Despite this "totally inappropriate" method which "lacked the appearance of impartiality" required to maintain the confidence of the public and the accused in the system, Tyson's conviction was not reversed.
The Dissenting Opinion
In his strong dissent from the majority opinion, Judge Patrick Sullivan argued that Tyson's conviction should be reversed and he should have been granted a new trial. He believed that Tyson had not been afforded a fair trial or a level playing field. "My review of the entire record in the cause leads me to the inescapable conclusion that he did not receive the requisite fairness which is essential to our system of criminal justice."
This judge believed that the three excluded witnesses for the defense should have been allowed to testify. Defense counsel could not have revealed the witnesses sooner, because they were not yet known. Further, they had a duty to conduct a reasonable investigation before seeking to add witnesses. They acted reasonably and diligently.
"Not only was there no discovery order breach, there was no delay, substantial or otherwise. Even if there were some degree of unexplained delay, given the absence of bad faith upon the part of the defense, the State at most would be entitled to a continuance. … Failure to request a continuance constitutes a waiver of an alleged discovery breach. … Not only did the State not seek a continuance, it categorically stated that it did not want a continuance."
This judge recognized the potential importance of the excluded testimony:
"The State's position with respect to the prejudice to its presentation of evidence becomes somewhat schizophrenic, and most certainly inconsistent. On the one hand, the State attempts to diminish the importance of the testimony of the three witnesses by asserting that it would have had minimal impact upon the issues and was meaningless as merely cumulative. On the other hand, the State has acknowledged that the excluded testimony might have grave implications for a successful prosecution. It so indicated by emphasizing the great lengths to which the State would have to go to combat this testimony. It is clear that the State did not think the evidence to be merely cumulative. The State was very concerned "given the impact of these witnesses on this case, given the notoriety of this case, given what this case is all about…. These witnesses clearly would have been telling a story wholly different than the story we had." …
As earlier noted, we are restricted in validating the ruling of the trial court to the reasons she gave. The trial court did not base its exclusion of the testimony upon a determination that the proffered evidence would merely be cumulative. The majority here, however, utilizes a conclusion to that effect to affirm the ruling. In doing so it errs."
The dissenting judge also believed the majority confused the differences between cumulative and corroborative evidence in its justifications.
"It is my view that the majority erroneously or inadvertently uses the term "cumulative" interchangeably with the term "corroborative". Cumulative evidence is that which goes to prove what has already been established by other evidence. … Corroborative evidence tends to corroborate or to confirm while cumulative evidence merely augments or tends to prove what has already been proved. … Evidence which brings to life some new and independent truth of a different character, although it tends to prove the same proposition or ground of claim before insisted on, is not cumulative, within the true meaning of the rule….
The testimony sought to be admitted here was different in kind and character from other evidence adduced at trial. It went to an issue or issues and to facts or observations not covered by other evidence. It was not cumulative. It may have been in the nature of corroboration with respect to the crucial facts surrounding and immediately preceding the sexual acts but that very aspect of corroboration is what made the exclusion of the evidence prejudicial to the defense."
The dissenting judge took the majority to task for calling the evidence merely impeaching, as if that was not crucially important to the defense, and also noted that Tyson's proposed jury instructions regarding mistake of fact should have been provided to the jury:
"One aspect of the majority opinion considers the excluded evidence as merely impeaching in nature and holds that it was merely cumulative of evidence which impeached D.W. "on other points". … I strongly disagree. Even if the offered evidence were to be construed solely as impeaching, impeachment upon one issue is not cumulative of impeachment upon other issues. …
The evidence of record, to which the excluded evidence is thought by the majority to be cumulative, demonstrates that the jury was entitled to believe that there was consensual sexual contact in the hotel room. There was testimony to that effect from Reverend Katherine Newlin, who attended D.W. at the hospital. … At a very minimum, such testimony gives rise to a strong and reasonable inference of consensual sexual contact in the hotel room. It is baffling indeed, therefore, that the majority proceeds to cavalierly discount the defendant's reasonable belief contention.
The manner in which Tyson and D.W. acted toward each other shortly before the acts complained of has great relevance to whether or not Tyson, at the time, might have reasonably believed, from all the surrounding circumstances and events, that D.W. was consenting–even though as a factual matter she did not consent. …
The issue is not whether Tyson reasonably believed that D.W. would consent. It is whether he reasonably believed that she was consenting. In this sense, then, the exclusion of the testimony from Martin, Neal and Lawrence was particularly prejudicial and that prejudice was magnified by the failure to give instructions with respect to mistake of fact, reasonable belief or to instruct that the degree of culpability, i.e., knowing, was applicable to the essential element of compelling force.
In holding that the evidence excluded was "only minimally corroborative of Tyson's testimony" with respect to D.W.'s receptiveness to Tyson's physical advances, the majority usurps the jury function. It is totally inappropriate for this court to convert speculation as to the credit and weight which a jury would give certain evidence or the impact of such evidence upon their consideration of other evidence into a holding as a matter of law.
Without question there was error in excluding the testimony of Ms. Martin, Ms. Neal and Ms. Lawrence. Without question that error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt."
This judge believed that "the excluded testimony of Ms. Martin, Ms. Neal and Ms. Lawrence would have added to the factual mix before the jury and may have reasonably tipped the deliberative balance in favor of acquittal."
Tyson's Second Appeal
In Tyson v. State, 626 N.E.2d 482 (Ind.App. 2 Dist., 1993), Mike Tyson alleged that his conviction should be reversed as a result of newly discovered evidence, which was that all along Washington had planned to sue Tyson in civil court, despite previous claims to the contrary.
However, the Indiana Court of Appeals held that Tyson's counsel had failed to ask Washington if she expected to receive any monetary benefits from her experience; if she had retained a lawyer named Ed Gerstein to pursue a civil suit; if she had any written agreement with Gerstein; if she had contemplated bringing a civil suit; if she had the present intent to sue Tyson; if she had discussed selling her media rights with anyone; if she wanted to sell or had contemplated selling her media rights; or if she believed she could exploit her experiences with Tyson in any other way.
Nevertheless, Tyson argued that his attorney's lack of diligence should be excused because Washington and her parents, in their depositions and at trial, testified perjuriously, falsely, or misleadingly in order to obscure his ability to discover the family's financial motives. In particular, Tyson claimed he was unable to put the "critical fact" before the jury that Washington had consulted with attorney Ed Gerstein "with a view towards instituting a civil action against Tyson" because "[t]he Washingtons took the position, at their depositions and before the jury at trial, that Gerstein … was retained only for defensive purposes…."
Although Judge Sullivan concurred with the majority in this ruling, he noted his belief that indeed, "D.W. and her parents gave misleading testimony."
"While I agree that Tyson's counsel failed to use reasonable diligence to discover the full details of the retainer agreement between D.W. and Edward Gerstein, I am unable to agree with the majority that the testimony of D.W. and her parents was not misleading. Although perhaps many of the various answers given with respect to the relationship with Gerstein were literal responses to the questions as phrased, and although the witnesses certainly had no duty to volunteer information, in light of the facts known by the witnesses, the answers were misleading.
D.W.'s answers carried the clear implication that Gerstein was retained only to "help me through this", i.e., the criminal trial, and that when the trial was over, her parents would pay him. Additionally, she belied the fact that she was the client when she testified that Gerstein was counsel for the family. More importantly, when asked whether there had been any discussions between Gerstein and the family concerning compensation, she unequivocally said: "No." …
Mrs. Washington testified that Gerstein was counsel for the family but that there was no written agreement relating to the relationship. In light of the fact that Mrs. Washington was a signator to the retainer agreement between Desiree Washington and Gerstein, that answer was also misleading.
Mr. Washington, also a signator to the agreement between D.W. and Gerstein, stated that he had retained Gerstein's services but categorically stated that the purpose was "to help ward off the media"… He also denied that any consideration whatsoever had been given to the possibility of a civil suit against Tyson. … Further, he denied that he had a contingency fee agreement with Gerstein and stated that his only agreement was to pay expenses. Again, in the context of the facts, the natural and logical implication of the testimony of all three witnesses was that there was no contingent fee agreement with Gerstein with regard to representation in civil proceedings.
In point of fact, the retainer agreement was entered into and signed on August 1, 1991. Although Donald C. Washington and Mary B. Washington were signators, as well as D.W., the agreement clearly states that D.W. is the only client–not the "family" and not Mr. and/or Mrs. Washington. It also clearly spells out that the purpose of the agreement is not to get D.W. or the family through the criminal trial or to "ward off the media," but rather was to procure legal representation regarding possible civil liability on the part of Tyson and others as a result of the "incident" of July 19, 1991.
If the information given by these witnesses were the only information available to defense counsel, the deposition and trial answers would have been sufficiently misleading as to indicate that further inquiry or issuance of a subpoena ducestecum would be wasteful and unavailing."
Nevertheless, this judge believed that based upon the knowledge already possessed, Tyson's trial counsel simply did not ask the right questions. Hence, the lack of due diligence defeated Tyson's "newly discovered evidence" argument, despite the fact that his counsel had been misled.
The Indiana Supreme Court declined to consider or hear Tyson's appeal at all, deadlocked at 2-2 in its vote whether to consider the case for further review (the fifth judge recused himself). A majority vote was needed. Hence, the Court of Appeals' decision stood.
Author Adam J. Pollack is the owner of winbykopublications.com, has written several books about early heavyweight champions, is a boxing referee and judge, and is a practicing attorney in Iowa City, Iowa.


George Krivo
DynCorp CEO George Krivo Inducted to 2018 Wash100 for His Leadership in Providing Support Services to the U.S. Military
Executive Mosaic is honored to introduce George Krivo, CEO of DynCorp International, as an inductee into the 2018 edition of the Wash100 — Executive Mosaic's annual selection of influential leaders in the government contracting arena — for his leadership in providing support to the U.S. military.
Krivo was promoted to his current role in July 2017 after serving as chief operating officer of the McLean, Va.-based company.
DynCorp won a potential six-year, $795.3 million contract from the U.S. Army in May 2017 to provide logistics services for fixed-wing aircraft fleets that carry out transport missions. Krivo says the contract award is a testament to DynCorp's experience with Army aviation.
"This win validates DI's reputation as the recognized worldwide leader in supporting U.S. Army aviation," said Krivo. "We have a rich history of supporting this mission and we are glad to have the opportunity to provide outstanding support to this important program once again."
Krivo discussed his company philosophy, saying DynCorp delivers a range of military services to help the government achieve savings, execute faster recruitment processes and free up government personnel to perform "inherently governmental" tasks
"There are a lot of capabilities that are more efficient if the U.S. government contracts them out to someone that does those capabilities in order to free up people to do the inherently governmental things — DynCorp provides the U.S. government with that capability."
He added that DynCorp prioritizes leadership values to help meet customers' requirements and support U.S. national security objectives.
"It's because we're really about people. In order to get the best out of all of us — for all of us to be our best — we have to lead and be led," Krivo said. "What it really comes down to is doing the right thing, always, and delivering the results that both our customers expect, and our ethics demand."
As a U.S. Army veteran, Krivo has over two decades of service in command and staff positions, with strong missile defense experience and regional expertise in Northeast Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. He sits on the board of directors for the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, which provides grief-counseling for the families of fallen soldiers. Before working at DynCorp, Krivo held executive positions with SAIC and DRS Technologies, as well as serving as a managing director for Cerberus Capital Management.
Executive Mosaic congratulates George Krivo and the DynCorp team for their selection to receive this award.
Click here to view the full list of leaders recognized in the Wash100.
Sign in to cast your vote for those executives with the greatest impact on government contracting.
About The Wash100
This year represents our fifth annual Wash100 award selection. The Wash100 is the premier group of private and public sector leaders selected by Executive Mosaic's organizational and editorial leadership as the most influential leaders in the GovCon sector. These leaders demonstrate skills in leadership, innovation, reliability, achievement and vision.


Transactions, Issues 48-55
at the end or centre, in mills of not less than three hundred and fifty feet in length ?"
1. Cotton manufacturing began in this country by utilizing its water powers, and at these beginnings water-wheels were limited in power; and for this, and also for financial reasons, short mills, say 100 to 150 feet in length, were built, and the power applied at one end.
2. When larger mills were wanted, they were frequently built across the valley of a stream, and two wheels were placed in the centre; to utilize the full power of the stream without digging canals or turning a corner with the power, and for the further reason that the art of making shafting was in its infancy, and 100 to 150 feet was as long as a line would work well; and for these reasons power was applied at the centre.
3. The application of power at the centre of mills, with numerous cumbersome belt boxes, took much valuable room and virtually divided each floor of the mill into two rooms.
4. When steam power began to be used to drive cotton mills in this country, the limitations of shafting led to the application of power at the centre of mills, for a material term of years; and this method necessitated the building of an L, or a separate building in the rear of the centre of a mill; either of which shut off much light; and, in many cases, one tower with stair-case was deemed sufficient for mills not over 350 feet long, and this tower was usually placed at the centre and on the front side of the mill; so that the tower and rear building, together with the belt boxes, shut off all valuable light from the centre of the mill, and in effect divided each floor into two rooms.
5. The introduction of turbine wheels concentrated water power; and this advantage, together with the fact that several of them could be coupled together, so that a very large amount of power could be concentrated, enabled mill builders to change the arrangement of mills to be operated by water power, so that they could be built of any length.
6. The wonderful improvement in steam engines has also concentrated vast amounts of steam power, and made it specially applicable to long mills.
7. Long mills permit the placing of towers not opposite each other; and hence they do not shut out much light.
8. The wonderful improvements in the art of making shafting and belting have also made the operation of long mills practicable.
9. I can best convey an idea of the improvements in shafting by calling your attention to the construction of the Amory Mill at Manchester, N. H., and the application of shafting to one of its rooms. This is a ring spinning room, containing 31,216 frame spindles, 1,500 spooler spindles, 20 warpers and 2 slashers. This room has but one line of shafting to drive the entire load. The power comes up on to the head end, which is 54 inch diameter, with 4 inch bearings. The line runs the entire length of the mill, running at a speed of 455 revolutions per minute, with sizes and lengths of shafting as follows, viz. : 105 feet of 22 inch diameter cold rolled shafting; 231 feet of 23 inch diameter cold rolled shafting ; 167 feet of 113 inch diameter cold rolled shafting.
10. Competition has led manufacturers up to the necessity of building mills so large, that as much machinery can be placed on one floor as one overseer and one second hand can take care of.
11. In conclusion, I feel that I am justified in saying that the improvements in motors, shafting and belting, aided by experience and competition, lead me to conclude that all mills, whether 100 or 600 feet long, should have the power applied at one end.
Mr. MESSENGER. I did not learn why Mr. Kilburn favored applying the power at one end. Perhaps he gave it, but I did not catch all he said about it.
Mr. Kilburn. Simply, the concentrated power keeps your wheels all in one spot; and avoids the darkening of your mills by either towers, or auxiliary buildings, located in the centre for water-wheels or steam engines.
Mr. GARSED. Mr. President, we built a mill in 1853, 500 feet long and 66 feet wide, with the engine in the middle. From that time to the present I think two shafts have probably given out in the picker room, where the girders gave way; therefore I should judge that it was a pretty good system to have the driving power in the middle of the mill. There are 20,000 spindles in that mill, and they have been running ever since 1853.
Mr. KILBURN. Mr. President, it may not be out of order for me to state that, years ago, we did not put upon the ordinary shafting more than one-third the load it was capable of bearing. I think the rule followed years ago by A. D. LOCKWOOD, of obtaining the power of shafting, was to cube the diameter, divide by the velocity in revolution, and multiply by 100. To-day in using ordinary shafting we usually divide by 33. The way ordinary shafting is made to-day, it is capable of bearing three times the load that was formerly put upon it. A cold rolled iron or cold rolled steel shafting is capable of bearing twice as much as ordinary iron; or, fall a little below that, and call it 13 to 1. I see Mr. Knight of the Amory Mills here to-day. He can tell us what the result has been by the use of shafting in that mill, some of which is smaller than I have spoken of.
Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. President, I can only say that the transmission of power in the Amory Mill is very satisfactory. The only peculiarity that I have noticed in the spinning room is that the shafting runs at very high speed, enabling us to use very large pulleys on the frames. We use a fourteen-inch pulley to drive 240 spindles; and we have no slipping of belts. In one of our mills we put in some spinning frames very similar to those in the Amory Mill, and both run 9,000 revolutions on No. 28 yarn. We did not get the yarn per spindle, that we did in the Amory Mill; very much to my surprise. On inquiry into the cause, I found that, as the bobbin was filled, the load became heavier on the spindles, and the belts were slipping. We did not get the speed on the front rolls that we did when they began with empty bobbins. The size of the frame-pulley, there, was nine inches. The pulley on shafting was something like 34 inches, I think, in diameter; but passed up through the floor onto the nine-inch pulley; as you see, covering only a small part of the circumference of the nine-inch pulley. In the Amory Mill we have no trouble of that nd. The slipping of belts, or anything of that kind, is almost an unheard-of thing.
Mr. Wm. J. KENT. Mr. President, when I was at the Grinnell Mill we had our belts all at one end; and we were thereby enabled to raise them up and get rid of the dirt, and passed the belt through the belt hole from one room to another.
Mr. BOURNE. Mr. President, I would like to inquire about the cold rolled shaft. I have had a little experience, and my experience has not been wholly satisfactory. I put in some a number of years ago. Whether I have had poor luck, or not, I cannot say.
Mr. KILBURN. Mr. President, I would say, as the result of my experience, that I occasionally get a poor shaft made of cold rolled iron; and when I do I send it back to the manufacturers and tell them to send me a new one, and I get it.
The PRESIDENT. We had a steel shaft in one of our mills that broke, and was renewed, several times; finally we got disgusted with it, and threw it out, and put in its place a common iron shaft of the same size, which has given us no trouble. Mr. KILBURN. I have not been troubled with the iron shaft.
I The brittleness of the steel shaft makes it objectionable, and I have avoided its use; but I have found extreme satisfaction in the use of the cold rolled iron, as far as my experience has gone.
Mr. MESSENGER. Mr. President, I presume the first cost of shafting would be considerable, would it not?
Mr. KILBURN. Of course the less shafting, the easier it is to run.
Mr. PARKER. It does not seem to me that the advantage of taking power into the end of the mill has been proven. On the other hand, I think that, as mills are belted to-day, - and no one perhaps would think of building a mill without putting the belting within a closed room or belt tower, — there is just as much light cut off from the machinery as if the belts were taken in at the centre or the engine room, and the belt tower
were placed in the centre of the mill, rather than at the end. At a mill in Lawrence there is a belt tower about 12 feet square that contains all the belts which drive the mill; requiring about 1,200 horse-power. Those belts enter the mill horizontally, without interfering with the running of the machinery. Possibly there is a little trouble in arranging the counter-belts which are needed near these main belts; but aside from that there is no interference, and there is no trouble whatever in bringing the belts in where they belong, and getting power on the main shafting. The suggestion that the shafting would have to be larger if the power enters at one end of the mill is a vital one; making the shafting cost more than it would if you should take your power in at the centre of the mill, especially where the power at the centre of the mill can be quickly distributed from that point. Several mills that I am acquainted with have the picking department, for instance, at the opposite end of the mill from where the engines are; and a very large amount of power has to be taken over a large shaft the whole length of the mill. There, of course, the application of the power at the centre of the mill or nearer the picker room would be of obvious advantage ; but as mills are ordinarily arranged, or, we will say, with the best arrangement that it is possible to make, there is no doubt in my mind that the shafting could be placed in a mill for less money where the power was taken in at the centre than at the end; and I cannot see how there would be any less light in the mill so arranged. In the case of the Lawrence mill the shaft runs across the mill, and the belts are run with a quarter turn; and where the belts enter
l the different rooms they run over carrier pulleys. We have never had any trouble with these belts. All are 20 inches wide, and two of them over 240 feet in length; and they have run eight years.
A MEMBER. What percentage of the total power is used in driving the shafting and loose pulleys, belts, etc.?
Mr. PARKER. I cannot give any figures for that mill; but I can quote from a paper which Mr. SHELDON should have read here at the last meeting, where he states that the least friction