Flea Bites On Puppues Belly

The trial of King Solomon

In the next post, I'm sticking to the trial of King Solomon, as that this decision is the paradigm of a just decision (hence the expression "is a Solomonic decision), but if we analyze the case in depth, we can find that this decision is at least debatable.

The trial of King Solomon

Then two women went to the king, and stood before him. One of them said

"Oh, my lord, this woman and I lived in the same house, and I gave birth to a child while she was in the house. After the third day, after I had my son, this woman also gave birth. We were alone. There was no anyone else in the house. This woman's son died in the night. She got up at midnight, and took my son from me, while thine handmaid slept, and put it in his bosom, and laid her dead child in my womb.

When I got up this morning to nurse my son, I realized he was dead, but when I looked closer in the morning, I realized that was not the boy who had given birth. But the other woman told me: No, the living child is mine, the dead one is yours. I replied no, the dead child is yours, and the living child is mine. "

So they came before the king.

Then the king said: "A says my son that is alive, and his son that is dead. " And the other says, "No, your son is dead and my son that is alive." And the king said, "Bring me a sword." So a sword was brought before the king. And the king said: "Split the baby in two and give half to one and half to the other."

The woman whose son was alive said to the king, because his heart yearned for his son, "Oh, my lord, give her the living child to another woman, but not kill him." The other woman said, " the child will be neither mine nor yours, divide it. "Then the king answered and said," Give the living child to the first woman, and by no means kill him, she is his mother''

And all Israel heard of the sentence which the king had been made and is impressed by the king, because it is perceived that the wisdom of God was in him to justice.

Questions:

1. What is the problem here?

• Who was the natural mother? Who would take care
• child better?

2. Could Solomon know who the real mother? Does this problem had a solution at that time?

3. Do you agree with the method used by Solomon find out who was the mother? What are the moral qualms that he could do? What are the epistemological objections to it could make to that environment? What would you think if a judge uses this mechanism now?

4. Do you think that both women genuinely believed that the child was hers?

5. According to you, what would build the wisdom of Solomon:

• was it a clever researcher?,
• "a fair judge?,
• enlightened" troubleshooter?, Or
• did a good gambler?

6. How could you focused and solved the case?

The case and the questions are taken from the following references:

MURRAY, Peter, Green & Nesson. Problems, Cases, and Materials on Evidence. Aspen Law and Business, 2005.

http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=k9840&pageid=icb.page34732&pageContentId=icb.pagecontent86710&view=view.do&viewParam_name=KingSolomonsJudgmentIKings316.html # a_icb_pagecontent86710
ANDERSON, Terence, David Schum and William Twining, Analysis of Evidence, 2d ed., 2005.

Part of the analysis and answers to the questions in this case, you can find en los siguientes links, libros y artículos:

MURRAY, Peter, Green & Nesson. Problems, Cases, and Materials on Evidence. Aspen Law and Business, 2005.

Ann Althouse. Beyond King Solomon's Harlots: Women in Evidence, 65 S. Cal. L. Rev. 1265 (1992)
Ann Althouse. The Lying Woman, The Devious Prostitute, and Other Stories from the Evidence Casebook, 88 Nw. U. L. Rev. 914 (1994).
ANDERSON, Terence, David Schum & William Twining, Analysis of evidence, 2d ed., 2005.

Tag: [ mis argumentos ]

Pityriasis Rosea Due To Pill

Decisions by the Constitutional Court: the principle of primacy of reality and the fundamental right to drinking water

Interesante jurisprudencia del Tribunal Constitucional sobre el principio de primacía reality and the fundamental right to "drinking water"

Principle of primacy of reality.

EXP. No.
LAMBAYEQUE 1944-2002-AA/TC
EDUARDO ENRIQUE Chinchay PUT

http://www.tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2003/01944-2002-AA.html

(... )

3. In the present case, applies the principle of primacy of reality, which means that in the event of discrepancies between what happens in practice and what flows from the documents, should be preferred to the former, that is, to what happens in the realm of facts. In this sense, the content of the contracts referred warns an employment relationship existed between the plaintiff and the defendant of the characteristics described in the preceding basis, so the work they performed were of a permanent nature and not possible, as shown by the defendant. (...)

EXP. SANTA
No. EDWIN EDLER 04691-2006-PA/TC JARA SOTELO
http://www.tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2008/04691-2006-AA.html

(...)

3. The plaintiff argues that the civil contracts signed with the Municipality located concealed, in fact, a relationship of work nature as it was contracted to do gardening and cleaning service, that is, work permanent nature, reason could not be dismissed but for a reason connected with your conduct or work capacity provided for by law, duly verified, to justify such a decision.

4. In that sense, the dispute centers on whether the civil contracts signed by the applicant concealed, in fact, a relationship of labor nature, because, if so, would therefore apply the principle of primacy of reality.

5. In relation to this principle, implicit in our legal system and enforced by the aforementioned protective nature of our Constitution, this school has stated that "(...) in cases of discrepancy between what happens in practice and what flows from the documents, should be preferred to the former, that is, what happens in the realm of facts. " (Rationale 3 of the STC No. 1944-2002-AA/TC)

(...)

fundamental right to drinking water

No.

EXP-PA 6546-2006 / TC
LAMBAYEQUE
ZUNIGA LOPEZ CESAR AUGUSTO

http://www.tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2007/06546-2006-AA.html

Is there a constitutional right to drinking water?

3. In a preliminary to the elucidation of this controversy, it should be noted that although what he claims the plaintiff has to do with an alleged infringement of rights such as health and property, underlying that claim a much more relevant issue, namely whether the decision to cut service drinking water affects a fundamental right independent, consisting of the same enjoyment and disposition of the liquid element. It is, in other words, to verify whether, in light of value choices recognized by our constitutional system, may or may not speak of a constitutional right to clean water and if after any breach or threatened, holds the constitutional protection gives the other attributes and freedoms expressly recognized by the Constitution.

4. By first intention and purpose of first responders guide reflection, it should be noted that although the highest Constitution explicitly recognizes no or nominal fundamental right to drinking water, this situation does not mean or be interpreted as that possibility is elided or deferred. Indeed, as has been highlighted in previous opportunities, fundamental rights can be individualized not only from a strictly grammatical or positive. To the extent that the law does not create strict sense, essential rights, but simply to recognize limits, their identification can operate not only from an option valuation or principlist as recognized in Article 3 of the Constitution of Peru but also appealing to a hermeneutic exercise under a systematic basis or variant of context-deductible clauses in the instruments on international human rights, many of which contain not only additional rights expressly recognized in the Constitution, but even much broader content offering to those who already have constitutional coverage.

drinking water as a constitutional right not listed.

5) In the specific case law drinking water, consider that while this attribute is not considered a positive level, there are nevertheless a number of reasons for consideration or recognition as a fundamental right. Taking this premise is, however, to outline their identification within the context provided by some of the perspectives outlined above. To this effect to the extent that there is no express provision containing such recognition domestically and internationally are still to be developed many of the areas that comprise the attribute, it is permissible to go, for this purpose, mainly the option valuation or principlist and implicit rights clause that allows you to serve as a reference. So, using the formula described above would allow individualization legitimize the existence of a right to water as a fundamental attribute not listed. Its recognition would be directly linked to important values \u200b\u200bsuch as human dignity and social and democratic state of law. Contents

fundamental right to drinking water. Personal and extrapersonal roles.

6) The right to water, in light of the context described, would, primarily, a duty of affirmative or performance based, whose realization would correspond mainly to promote the state. His condition makes it essential natural resource, a basic element for the maintenance and development not only of the existence and quality of human life, but other such basic rights as health, labor and the environment, resulting in almost impossible to imagine that without the presence of the liquid element, the individual can to satisfy their basic needs and even those which, without being, allow the improvement and development of their living conditions.

7) The water as a natural resource, not only directly contributes to the strengthening of fundamental rights in question, but from a perspective extrapersonal influences on social development and economic development through policies that the State is undertaking a number of sectors. Such is the case of agriculture, mining, transport, industry, etc. Can be said, therefore, that thanks to its existence and use is made possible sustained growth and ensuring that society as a whole is not adversely affected in the short, medium and long term.

8) Within this context, and even when not part of the disputed issue, it is clear that consideration of the essential role of water in favor of the individual and society as a whole, to suggest their status not only at the level of a fundamental right, but a target value to the State Constitutional corresponding privilege. Assumptions

minimum right to drinking water. Access, quality, adequacy

9) As regards the position of the individual as the beneficiary of the fundamental right to drinking water, the State is obliged to guarantee at least three essential things: access, quality and sufficiency. Without the presence of these three conditions, that attribute would be denatured well apart from the existence of the resource. It is not, therefore, to proclaim that water exists, but to provide a minimum set of assumptions to ensure their enjoyment or enjoyment of the human or individual recipient.

10) Access from this perspective, you should assume that since the state must be created, directly or indirectly (via dealers), about the resource conditions for the recipient fluid. To this end, various references can be: a) there must be water, physical facilities and services close to where people live, work, study, etc.., B) water, services and facilities must be fully accessible economic terms, ie in terms of costs must be within reach of anyone, except in cases that improved or specialized nature of the service, has required greater investment in empowerment, c) in accordance with rule above should not be allowed any discrimination or distinction, when it comes to playing field in the fluid supply element, from the State must protect preferably at the most vulnerable population, d) should be promoted a policy of continuous information on water use and on the need to protect as a natural resource.

11) The quality, in turn, must mean the obligation of ensuring full sanitation conditions in the liquid component and the need to maintain optimal levels of services and facilities with which it has to be supplied. Unacceptable, therefore, be that water can be dispensed in a manner that endangers life, health or safety of persons, debiéndose for that purpose take the necessary preventive measures to avoid contamination by microorganisms or harmful substances, or even by industrial mechanisms that might be damaging in terms of natural resource. Similar criterion has to be invoked for services or facilities with natural deterioration should not be a pretext for the generation of damage on the liquid element. Fulfilled its natural period of existence, the services or facilities should be replaced by others that offer similar or better quality standards.

12) The adequacy finally must involve the need for the natural resource conditions can be waived in appropriate quantity to allow at least meet the basic or primary needs of the person, such as those related to personal and domestic uses, or even those related to health, because they depend on the existence of each individual. Water, in other words, being an asset whose existence is guaranteed, neither can nor should be provided in all lighting conditions incompatible with the basic requirements of each individual.

13) In short, the State, within its social role and irrefutable logic of protecting human beings and their dignity, promote the drinking water constitutes not only a right of permanent use and enjoyment, but at the same time, an item in the service of an endless repertoire of rights, all as of extreme importance to the realization of the individual.

Long Freshman Sayings

reactions to changes in competition rules

While I think that in general, changes to the rules of competition and consumer protection have been positive, there are several aspects that are controversial. Here I have some comments from teachers Percy García Cavero, Juan Francisco Rojas and Julio Durand on recent changes in the rules of competition and consumer protection.

From reading these articles are derived several important points:

(i) the importance and impact of these standards in society, would not it have been better if these rules had been discussed by the Congress?

(ii) all proposed changes have been made within the framework of delegated powers?

(iii) can be regarded as collusive bidding is less serious than the conduct of a pickpocket? According to García Cavero, decriminalization of anticompetitive conduct is a benefit even in his country are U.S. companies.

(iv) the concept of diligent consumer does not protect the Peruvian consumer?

would be important to publish the exhibition memorandum to each of the amended rules, in order to ascertain what were the reasons that were behind these changes and, from there, consider whether these reasons justify or not the changes.

FTA "without criminal law? About the decriminalization of economic crimes against the competition and consumers
By Percy Rafhael García Cavero (*)

http://www.dircom.udep.edu.pe/boletin/viewArt.php?art = 2141
few weeks ago I took knowledge of the various legal reform projects that were taking place in the Executive in bankruptcy, antitrust and consumer protection. As a member Commission devolved Indecopi-Piura in bankruptcy matters, consumer protection, deceptive advertising and market access, I assumed that these new laws seek to bridge the gaps or deficiencies in existing legislation. And without doing further analysis of recent legislative decrees approved by the Executive, I would think that will bring great advantages in the important work of monitoring and control plays Indecopi. However, I have found a legislative policy clearly intended to make criminal law various economic crimes, to become mere administrative breaches. Surely the Executive to have assessed that it is much more efficient leave all against market misconduct under the control and punishment of Indecopi. As there has been more discussion about it, I guess there will be some reason. However, I regret to say that I think the worst decision I've seen in criminal matters in recent times. And I mean from all levels.

In strictly legal, the decriminalization of abuse of economic power in the market (232 CP), hoarding (233 CP), misleading advertising (238 PC), consumer fraud (239 CP) , unfair competition (240 CP) and collusive tendering (241 subsection 3 CP), would say that this does not social disvalue already have enough to be criminally punished. This means that if firms in a sector of the market at a price agreed between nakedly harming consumers, may not receive a penalty or if a company with a dominant position makes exclusionary practices of other competitors, nor can receive any criminal sanction. Nor may receive penalty clearly denigrates the competitor competitor's products or openly exploits the reputation of the competitor, and neither the producer, manufacturer or dealer that detracts from the market in order to create scarcity and ultimately harm consumers . And not to mention of those involved in public procurement and collude to set a price and defrauding the state, getting a much higher price that would have resulted from a struggle between competing companies really. With these new rules of the executive, approved in order to adapt our legislation to the FTA, it would remove from the criminal sphere all the above cases.

arguably no need to fear, because these behaviors are administrative violations that come with them enormous administrative fines. Well, first we must remember that Indecopi functional organs not usually make very high fines. But independence of the reference data, which is completely unaware that an administrative fine of not only has a very limited virtual intimidating, but the offense gives it a neutral pound social criticism that deserves this type of behavior. I mean, if the fine may be he could be sentenced to a company engaged in anticompetitive conduct was a hundred and gain by this practice was a thousand, do you think the company is going to stay faithful to the law? On the contrary, if the penalty was imprisonment for managers, confiscation of illicit profits or gains (section 102 of the CP or the Law of loss of control), did not generate this more effective preventive? Sure, you could say that Indecopi is pursuing better and ability to punish rather than the judiciary, where entrepreneurs always go offenders go free. But then this means that the problem is the lack of a criminal justice specialist in economic issues, which would bring the solution to provide the Judiciary of adequate infrastructure and training to combat economic crime, instead of giving give certain conduct the necessary criminal sanction in exchange for an administrative fine in the big cases, will not generate any preventive effect. But further consideration of mere infringement administrative offenses listed above would equate, at least formally, a step of red light or failure to issue a bill. So there is nothing to criticize those who abuse their dominant position of those who make unfair competition, market hogs, leaving consumers without supplies, etc. Anyone passing a red light [The example is not accurate. In theory, the fine must exceed the profit from the illegal practice, which is why employers would not have incentives in this practice. Could be made supportive to company executives who participated in the unlawful conduct. Now But this is theory should be accompanied by empirical research to confirm this hypothesis. Otherwise, everything is at the level of assumptions]

In terms of legislative technique, is also a tremendous mistake what you are doing the Executive. His policy of decriminalization not only follows a completely opposite to what happens in the civilized world, but that does not correspond precisely with the country which has concluded the FTA. In fact, the Sherman Act of 1890 which regulates the conduct U.S. antitrust law is a criminal, that is, that while in the United States anticompetitive conduct are serious crimes in our country these behaviors are only an administrative offense. What a great scenario for Americans, Peruvians penalty for what they do in the U.S. and U.S. administrative penalty for practicing in Peru anticompetitive behavior. It seems that symmetrical treatment was not considered at all in this case. [The fact that in other countries to penalize a particular practice does not mean it should also be so in the country. Should give reasons why it is necessary that such conduct is punishable by imprisonment]

But the legislative decision is not saved or politically. In fact, I think a big political mistake what you are doing the Executive. There appears to be typical of a government "progressive" proceed to decriminalize behaviors related to the activity of certain economic groups. Thus, while the pickpocket who steals a wallet valued at a minimum living wage will go up to three years in jail (even when arrested), who defraud consumers or the state itself in collusive tendering in terms of millions just going to receive an administrative fine. I should add that I am not making a critique of classism, because entrepreneurs might not realize that themselves are affected by this type of crime. In fact, normally have an anticompetitive exclusionary effect, ie out of the market to other competitors or in the case of unfair competition is always the injured competitor, or hoarding may be made by a producer and harm traders. Economic crimes generate a detrimental impact on all operators in the market and what is worse, confidence in the entire economic system, so use a purely administrative reaction mechanism predicts an absolute failure in the fight against this type of crime. [The qualification that this policy is not typical of a government "Progressive" is ideological. In any case, the penalty or not conduct should not depend on whether a government is progressive or liberal. Must be reasons for the criminalization of certain conduct, which must be sustentandas on value judgments as empirical research, which is not usually do much in the law]

(emphasis mine) The

comments in brackets are mine.

http://aeperu.blogspot.com/2008/07/en-el-per-los-mercados-no-son-libres.html

markets in Peru are not free.

Juan Francisco Rojas

It is usual to claim that the free market means letting things happen without regulation and without control, much less the evil state that only serves to annoy the initiative of individuals.

In eighteen years of dogma and enthusiast can compare some results: the most important markets in Peru are highly concentrated. This means that there are powerful groups that can impose their conditions on others, which do not depend on the efficiency or quality production, but the power they have on their business, built on the basis of factors such as market share, access exclusive technology, inability to find replacements easily, large investments required for the entry of new competitors, lack of consumer information, among others.

According to the prestigious consulting Maximixe (1) and other findings, are highly concentrated markets include: financial and insurance, food (milk, oil, wheat, meats, sodas, beer), fuel, service stations, electricity (generation and distribution), sanitation, construction materials (iron, cement, brick), Oil, LPG, cooking gas, pension funds, stationery, telephone, rail, air transport, department stores, supermarkets.

In markets there is no competition, there is only a farce that ensures the benefits of those who have built their position of power and who are able and willing to do anything to keep it. Market power also expands the world of political decisions, opinion formation, education and even the pseudo knowledge.

How much is the importance of this issue in the daily life of Peruvians? How much impact the economy of the citizens these power structures? When a market agent is not competent decisions based on their unique individual interests. Prices rise, quality low, tied sales are common and discrimination is installed. The big hurt is the consumer because the free market where competition prevails, there. [Here the author should provide evidence that current market structures which refers not benefit consumers. The fact that the market is concentrated does not necessarily imply a loss for the consumer, which is what the author wants to convey implicitly]

is time for society to raise the struggle for free markets recover, to regain competition, to eliminate the abuse of dominant position and to oppose all forms of speculation, hoarding and consultation that cause so much damage to the economy of all Peruvians. not meet these requirements is quite effective hatching a formula to generate a situation of violence and popular protest.

With great blindness, the government called to defend the free market competition and give up just giving up legislation on merger control and the Criminal Code repealing economic crime. is necessary for laws regulating the markets is discussed in Parliament and not decided at midnight under the influence of a coterie of enlightened only represent the interests of some. [At this point, I partially agree with the author. In the sense it is the Congress that adopted such laws, but not if they should develop them. I think Congress should establish the principles upon which laws should be developed. The principles would express the political agreements and values \u200b\u200bthat have reached various political groups in Congress. The next step would be to develop standards on these principles. I think this would be a proper alignment between policy and technology]

(1) Jorge Chávez Álvarez, "Market Structures and Institutions Where We Are."

(emphasis added)

The comments from brackets are mine.

reasonable consumer

http://www.elcomercio.com.pe/edicionimpresa/Html/2008-07-13/los-cambios-deben-difundirse.html

For example, for Doctor of Law and university professor in July Durand Carrión, we must revise the amendment to paragraph a), Article 3 of the new Consumer Protection Act, which literally says: "This law protects consumers acting in the market ordinary diligence, according to the circumstances. "
"If we apply the term strictly, a large sector of consumers who do not have access to education consumption, would be unprotected. That is, for the consumer would Indecopi stupid and irrational, unable to drive on the market, and therefore do not deserve legal protection, "said the specialist.
Durand recalled that according to the National Institute of Statistics and Informatics ( INEI), the country had 12.1% of illiterates. "So we can not be taken to the extreme of creating in the process of interpretation a reasonable consumer or diligent ideal exists only in imperfect market economy like ours, where information is a scarce resource, economic agents behave in an atypical manner, and, more critically, no market culture, "he added.
Counsel considers a success include intermediate customers and not just the end, under the protection of the law, but warns that the rule should also include new developments in the procurement of goods and services, purchases over the Internet.

Stranne Replacement Bulb

Antonin Scalia: Torture is not "cruel and unusual punishment"

Controversial statements by top government officials and the judiciary in the U.S..

This is an extract from an interview with Justice Scalia, one of the best known judges the U.S. Supreme Court. I've put some links of video of the interview.

http://www.democracynow.org/es/2008/4/29/titulares

And the Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia stated publicly that torture of prisoners does not violate the prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishment" of the Eighth Amendment. Scalia's comment came during an interview with Lesley Stahl on 60 Minutes on CBS.
Justice Scalia said: "I do not like torture. But it will be difficult to define. But, I mean, who is in favor? Nobody. And we have a law against torture. But not everything that is hateful hatred is covered by any provision of the Constitution. "
Stahl said: "If someone is in custody, as in Abu Ghraib, and is beaten by a maintenance person order, if you hear the expression, cruel and insusual, do not apply? ".

Scalia: "No, no."
Stahl, "cruel and unusual punishment?".
Scalia: "On the contrary. You think ... you think so. Does anyone have ever spoken of torture or punishment? I think not. "
Stahl: "Well, I think if you are in custody and have a policeman who took him into custody ...."
Scalia: "And you say he's punishing you?".
Stahl: "Sure."
Scalia: "Why is punishing? You punish somebody .... "
Stahl: "Well, because it assumes you, one, committed a crime ...."
Scalia: "No".
Stahl: "O ...."
Scalia: "No".
Stahl: ".. you know something he wants to know."
Scalia: "The last. And when, when he, when he hurts to get information from you .... "
Stahl: "Yes"
Scalia: ".. you do not say he's punishing you. Why is punishing? He's trying to get .... "
Stahl: "Because you think you are a terrorist, and will hit ya know what ...." Scalia: "Anyway, that's my opinion. And it is correct. " Links

where opinion on Scalia's position

http://saberderecho.blogspot.com/2008/02/la-miseria-del-textualismo.html
http://seminariogargarella.blogspot.com/ (known Argentine professor of constitutional law. He studied at Chicago and Oxford) Here you can see the video interview with Scalia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonin_Scalia transcribes the interview in English.

worth seeing the video or, in any case, read the transcript in the original language. Statements

U.S. Vice President and the highest authorities of the CIA

The national intelligence director and the attorney general felt that waterboarding would be torture or submarine itself, if they apply to them, and maybe today the practice and would be illegal, as has historically managed and the U.S. government itself, "two of the most senior figures in Washington were quick to defend torture.
Vice President Dick Cheney defended the "harsh interrogation program" of the CIA and said he would do the same again, while Antonin Scalia, justice of the Supreme Court, said publicly that beatings and other forms of interrogation are acceptable when necessary by circumstances.

http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2008/02/20/index.php?section=mundo&article=037n2mun

M Jak Milosc Odcinki 808

The court orders to torture: torture against time

A controversial proposal of a famous professor of law Harvard, I read some years ago. In the end I put some links and articles that have a contrary position, both from a moral standpoint, as the law of evidence (evidence) in the sense of whether it is a reliable mechanism for information.

Bill Clinton, torture advocate Alan M.
Dershowitz
http://www.libertaddigital.com/index.php?action=desaopi&cpn=34052

several years ago provoked a storm of controversy by advocating the "torture warrants" as a way to create transparency for the use of torture in terrorism cases. I argued that if ever we were in a frame of mind like "trial" in which the authorities think that an impending terror attack could only be avoided by forcing torture a captured terrorist to reveal the location of the bomb, the authorities would use in practice that method.

Although I personally oppose the use of torture, I recognize the reality that some forms of torture have been, are and will continue to be used by democracies in extreme situations, no matter what we say or what the law dictates. In an effort to limit the use of torture to those situations "trial" truly extreme, rather than let it become routine, suggested that the president or a federal judge had to take personal responsibility for ordering its use in extraordinary situations .

For suggesting this approach to the terrible choice between the evils of torture and terrorism, was condemned as a moral monster, labeled an advocate of torture and called Inquisitor.

It turns out that former President Clinton has made a similar proposal. In a recent interview on National Public Radio, Clinton was asked, as someone who "has been in this position" if the president needs "the option of authorizing torture in an extreme case." This was his answer:

Look, if the president needed an option, there are all kinds of things you can do. Choose the best example, right? You captured someone you know is the assistant number two to Osama bin Laden. And you know it has launched an operation planned for the United States or some European capital in the coming ... three days. And you know this guy knows. Well, it's the clearest example. And you think you can only get it out to such drugs or injecting some into believing that drowned or otherwise. If you really believe that this scenario is likely to happen, let me make an alternative proposal.
We have a law here that allows no one is above the law, and does not require advance approval for secret torture disguised. Can legislate a much less permissive statute that allows the president to consider a case such as that just outlined, and after that review could be submitted even after the facts before the Court Foreign Intelligence Surveillance.

A Clinton asked then I was saying that "would have more responsibility for what had been done after [the facts]." He replied: "Yeah, well, the president could take personal responsibility for it. But you do it on a case by case basis and there would be some kind of review of it. "Clinton quickly added that he does not know if this scenario trial" is likely or not ", but he knew that" we were wrong about who was suspected or actual no. "Clinton summarized his views as follows:

If you really believe it is time where the only way to obtain reliable information is to get it out to shock someone or injecting a drug to you the count, can then be submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Court, or any other court, exactly under the same circumstances we do with wiretaps. Post facto ...
But I think if you go around passing laws that legitimize a violation of the Geneva Convention and institutionalize what happened at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo, we're going to get into real trouble.

is surprising that this interview with former president has received so little attention from those who were so quick to fall on me. Clinton goes even further than me. In extreme cases, it would authorize the licensing post facto by a specialized court, as is now the case with recordings of national security. What I proposed es que la autorización legal fuera concedida antes de permitirse el uso de medidas extremas. Una licencia preliminar podría extenderse en cuestión de minutos, a acompañarse de una evaluación más exhaustiva tras los hechos y un examen.

Ofrecí mi controvertida propuesta como modo de estimular el debate acerca de una elección difícil entre diversos males. Espero que el silencio tras la entrevista de Clinton no signifique que el debate ha terminado. El problema permanece. La tortura continuará. No dejemos de pensar y hablar sobre si el mal de la tortura es realmente un mal necesario.

Una propuesta contraria lo pueden leer en el siguiente link:

http://www.geocities.com/jagamado/

All totalitarian torture, all torture is totalitarian. Juan García Amado

The Book: John Langbein, Torture and the Law of Proof. This book analyzes the totura from the perspective of the law of evidence, specifically, as a mechanism to obtain evidence of the defendant in the course of a sentence. In the end, if not bad memory, it is concluded that this is not a reliable mechanism to gather evidence about a particular event, beyond the grave moral objections that would prevent applying this kind of acts against people.

See also: Torture and Plea Bargaining. John H. Langbein. The University of Chicago Law Review, Vol 46, No. 1 (Autumn, 1978), pp. 3-22. DAMASK, Mirjan. The death of legal torture. Yale Law Journal. Vol 87 860, 1978. Book review of Torture and the law of Proof.

What's interesting address torture, not only from a moral perspective, but from the perspective of the law of evidence (evidence), it allows us to assess whether this mechanism is a reliable means to obtain information about a particular event. Besides that I have moral objections against such a mechanism, I think not used to obtain reliable information.

Philosophically you can see the following links:

Http://gonzalogamio.blogspot.com/2007/12/eplogo-al-debate-sobre-los-griegos-y-el.html
http://eduardohernandonieto.blogspot.com/search/label/Griegos

Antique Looking Plain Wrapping Paper

respirito Increase vegetables in the rainy season

The sectors most affected tomato, zucchini, cauliflower and brócoliEste weekend the price list of Consumer Guide has a strong upward trend in the price of vegetables, up over 50 cents (0.50 Bolivars) in items such as tomatoes, zucchini, cauliflower and broccoli.

wholesalers and retailers agree that this week the costs rose at an alarming rate for the winter. The rains have wasted many "cuts" or crops most sensitive items, in the sowing period and the time of collection.
For example, the basket of tomatoes in the wholesale market-content-approximately 20 kg was trading at 80 Bs, which only the greater would be around 4 Bs, excluding the profit margin from vendors. The same happens with the cauliflower and broccoli that are above the three bolivars wholesale, and lettuce seems to follow the same steps and increase their price to more than 4 Bs.F. The banana and cassava are keeping their prices for weeks, but the banana showed a significant increase due a drop in production and product input from the state of Zulia. This week is between 3.5 and 5 Bs, priced at more than 180 Bs.F the package.

However, the pope who until now had been an exaggerated tendency to rise, apparently took its toll on a stop and stalled between four and six Bs, depending on the type and quality. Last week he had noted an increase in a strong market bolivar city of San Cristobal, heavy rains and flooding in the Colombian coffee axis also finished with a large number of crops, but this week the entry of large numbers potato from the state of Merida caused prices to decline and remain as last week. While fruit prices had remained virtually unchanged for several weeks, this week some fruits showed a slight variation as papaya, that the presentation of papaya come to get even over the 4 Bs strong kilo, although Creole presentation can be found even at 2 Bs.F.Sin however, highlights the situation of the passion fruit.

addition to the production fell and many cuts were damaged by the rains, some vendors have chosen not to buy by the high prices that ultimately represent a loss to their businesses for its low weight and for being "pure shell "Constant change

Vendors and wholesalers agree that constant change, almost daily, prices, depending on climatic conditions and scarcity of the different items, has caused heavy losses to producers, because although production costs are constantly increase, especially in regard to the agro-must sometimes sell their goods at lower prices, for example, due to increased amounts of a product in the wholesale market. Wholesalers can not bill clarifies that not even one day in advance because doing so would represent losses to an excessive increase in the price of overnight

Get Well Card - Broken Leg

Some ideas on disciplinary proceedings in the new law enforcement of anticompetitive

In recent weeks, the Government has issued a set of standards critical to the functioning of the state and the economy. Within this package is a set of rules for ensuring competition and consumer protection, both substantive and procedural aspects. In this brief comment, I will discuss some issues concerning the design the sanctioning procedure governing the conduct law enforcement anticompetivas (Legislative Decree No. 1034), which, in general, is very similar to other disciplinary proceedings handled by the Indecopi.

Article 18 of Legislative Decree No. 1034, (hereinafter Leg. 1034) provides that the disciplinary proceeding is always initiated ex officio or at the initiative of the Technical Secretariat or part. However, this article is not clear about the role that is assigned to run: part? "Intervener? Do you collaborate? Procedurally, they are distinct legal concepts. On the one hand, the article notes that the administered is a collaborator, but on the other, allows you to challenge the decision declaring inadmissible or unfounded complaint, which does not seem appropriate to a single partner. This contradiction within the law itself must be clarified by the jurisprudence of the Board and, ultimately, by the judiciary.

Note that there are arguments worthy of consideration for the ownership of research and order of initiation of an infringement procedure only, and only, it corresponds to a public body [1] . For example, the administrative body which bears the title of the research is guided by the principle of legality, that is, he can only charge if they exist sufficient evidence to prove the defendant's responsibility. This, in turn, implies that the administrative body find evidence both for and against the hypothesis that operate on the responsibility of investigation, which also must be accessible to citizens.

Indeed, the administrative body defends the public interest, which involves a thorough investigation of the facts are analyzed. The national coach has an obligation to really find out what happened, beyond the defense and arguments that may pose the investigation.

In the case of managed complainant, this does not have the incentives and the duty to defend the public interest. He only promotes the procedure it seeks to defend their rights and interests. These incentives lead naturally to the present administered only evidence that favors his position. It would be irrational to do otherwise.

However, there are arguments that can be given the opportunity to be parties to proceedings, as the lack of government resources to conduct investigations, the more knowledge individuals have about the market, etc.

ideal option to consider would be administered as part, but provided that certain safeguards be established that prevent managed to handle the procedure, such as disclosure of any information they have in their possession relevant to the proceedings, under sanction. If it is demonstrated that the parties and their attorneys intentionally been hidden or distorted information, it could punish them severely. You can also set burdens of proof that create incentives for parties to disclose information.

Another point which is not very clear in the D. Leg. 1034 is referred to the lack of distinction between the research stage to the stage of discussion of the arguments of the parties. For example, states that within the procedure will be the preliminary stage, and set a period of seven months to act evidence. However, there are other articles which state that for the initiation of disciplinary proceedings is necessary prima facie evidence.

In this regard, I think the confusion is due, in part because it does not distinguish between the research phase of the startup phase of the process itself (call it contradictory). Thus, in the research phase, as its name implies, it is investigated, for example, why they raised prices of goods. To this end, the Secretariat will handle several hypotheses, some referring to a possible conclusion, other causes relating to market. At this stage, the Secretariat will require information, documents, summon witnesses, make inquiries and, in general, all acts deemed necessary to confirm or rule out the hypothesis that it is investigating.

Therefore, and following the Constitutional Court's jurisprudence, I believe that the Secretariat should not open an infringement procedure against a company if you do not have a plausible argument for an infringement by the defendant. The Secretariat should carry a charge to run the commission of an offense when she, in his view, is satisfied that this has actually happened. You can not impute to a including the commission of an offense, if you do not have enough evidence to enable it to make that complaint.

From my point of view, to open an infringement procedure, the Technical Secretariat should follow the criteria set forth in Resolution No. 028-2008-INDECOPI/CLC [2] of May 13, 2008, to open a disciplinary proceedings:

For this reason, it is necessary that any report provided that at least the following requirements: • Description and

clear and precise identification of the allegedly unlawful conduct committed by the defendant. In that sense, not enough to assert, in general, a person had abused its dominant position or made an anticompetitive practice, it is necessary to explain clearly and precisely what the specific conduct that would constitute abuse of dominance or restrictive practice;

• Description of the facts that would infer the commission of the conduct in question. So, if it is a complaint that is built on the basis of indirect evidence, the complainant shall indicate what facts or indirect evidence that would infer that the defendant committed the conduct charged;

· If the case, the legal and, in general, legal reasoning that supports that the events described can be qualified as abuse of dominance or anticompetitive practices and, in particular, allow us to infer the existence of the charges against him the accused, and,

• The offer of the evidence that credited the allegations.

There are many more interesting things to look at this law and other governing the work of Indecopi, as the "change? consumer standard protects the consumer protection law, which will be commented later.

[1] The debate about the pros and cons of the procedure American adversarial system might give some light on how far you can rely on the private parts of the process progress. In this regard, you can review the following literature: Pizzi, William T. Trials Without Truth. Why Our system of criminal trials has Become an expensive failure and What We Need to do to rebuild it. New York University Press, 1999. FRANKEL, Marvin. Partisan Justice. McGraw Hill, 1978. Langbein, John. The origins of adversary criminal Univesity trial.Oxford Press, 2002. Landsman, Stephan. Readings on adversarial Justice: The American Approach to adjudication. West Group, 1988.

also the exchange between teachers Langbein and Allen. Langbein, John. The Germ Advantage in Civil Procedure, 52 Univ of Chicago Law Review 823 (1985). ALLEN, Ronald. The Germ Advantage in Civil Procedure: A Plea for Greater Detail and Fewer Generalities in Comparative Law Scholarship, 82 Northwestern Law Review 705-762 (1988) (with Rosen, Koch & Reichenberg). Langbein, John. Trashing "The German Advantage," 82 Northwestern Law Review 763 (1988). And the response from ALLEN, Ronald. Idealization and Caricature in Comparative Law Scholarship, 82 Northwestern Law Review 785-807 (1988).

[2] The following link is the access to the decision under review:
http://www.indecopi.gob.pe/ArchivosPortal/publicaciones/5/2008/1-208/7/ 9/Res028-2008.pdf

Groping Chikan In Bus

What is the science of judicial proof?

Wigmore, The Science of the judicial proof.

What is the science of judicial proof? The study of the principles of Evidence, for a lawyer, falls into two parts. One is the test in a general sense - the aspect of the rational process of persuasion-contentious, mind to mind, the lawyer the judge or jury, each side seeking to come to the mind of the court. The other part is admissible - the procedural rules devised by the law, and litigation based on experience and tradition, to safeguard the court (especially the jury) against an erroneous persuasion. So far, Finally it has come further in formal studies, - in fact had monopolized, while previously it has been virtually ignored, left to the chance of a subsequent acquisition, casual and empirical, experience and practice. Here we have been wrong for two reasons.

one hand, there is, and must have a science test - principles of evidence - independent of the artificial rules of procedure, so this can and should be studied. This science is certain, is still imperfectly made. But all you need is there to begin with, "serious," to investigate and develop it. The procedural rules of eligibility are simply a preliminary support for the main activity, viz, the persuasion of the mind of the court for a correct conclusion through safe materials. This is the main target for the jury, and on which the lawyer must concentrate.

And on the other hand, the legal rules of admissibility are intended to decrease in relative importance during the next period of development. The tests assume the important place, and we must therefore prepare for this change of emphasis. We should seek to acquire a scientific understanding of the principles of what could be called evidence "natural" - The process so far left .....

The principles of evidence, then, represent the natural process of mind in dealing with factual evidence after they are admitted to the jury, while eligibility rules represent the artificial legal rules to our Anglo-American jury system. So, this should be studied first [principles of evidence] [1] . They bring into play the reasoning processes that are already in possession of intelligent and educated. To familiarize them with the materials commonly trial presented at trial, and thus prepare them to assume greater artificial rules preparation Eligibility devised by the judicial experience to safeguard the judicial investigation of the facts.

addition, this testing process is after all more important in the trial [2] . The trial ends with that something is missing or not tested. When the evidence already admitted, the lawyer is, himself, in his last and crucial task, ie that is to persuade the jury on the facts that were alleged in the process. To do this, he must reason of course, like all reasonable men as jurors may be shown to understand. He must have been familiar with the process of reasoning that men use naturally, and the overall experience for the class inferences commonly required in the Trials. At this stage, he has to use the artificial rules of admissibility. Those who were treated at the start, by the judge. The evidence is in, and the question now is, what is its purpose? All eligibility rules could be set aside, even the principles of evidence would, as the trials continue as a rational attempt to find the truth in legal disputes ... (Wigmore, Science § 1 and 2).

Translated and adapted from Anderson, Terence, David Schum and William Twining, Analysis of Evidence, 2d ed., 2005, pp. 87 and 88.

[1] Added mine.

[2] Trial I have translated as trial.