In the 9.15 PM incident, the victim who is in his 40s was on his way to meet a friend in a restaurant when he stopped his car at the location after seeing a Perodua Kancil stranded and wanted  to offer help. There were two men and a woman in the car.

However, as soon as he stopped and went out of the car, a man with iron knife suddenly came and attacked him; the attack had amputated his left wrist.

The victim managed to escape and went back into his car before driving himself to Gleneagles Hospital which is two kilometers from the location covered in blood. Dr R Palani who is who lead the surgery said he and another doctor, together with two nurses, a medical assistant and an ambulance driver took almost half an hour to find the missing hand that was left at the site.

The decision to look for the hand was made by Dr Marry Anne who pushed the victim to tell the exact location of the incident since they believe the hand still have a high chance to be save. The victim finally opens up and informed the location. They have managed to find it on the pedestrian around 100 meter from the actual location.

Telling the story, Dr R Palani said he had received a call from collogues from the emergency and came straight to the hospital. As soon as he arrived, he noticed that the man’s hand was hacked with one blow and believed it had just happened seeing that the blood was still squirting out from the arm. He added that they quickly informed the police and requested for the rescue team to search for the missing wrist. According to him, after waiting for half an hour, the police informed them that they had failed to find the hand; the victim then insisted that the doctors should go and look for it themselves.

The dark surrounding and clues that was given by the victim were not much help since they were only got their mobile phone light to guide them. For the time being, the victim is stable and is still receiving physiotherapy treatment to ensure his newly attached hand can function well.  Meanwhile, the Assistant Commissioner denies the doctor claimed saying the authority did not took action after being informed about the incident by the security officer who was at the location.  

He also added that the delay happened due to the information that was given was incorrect. Commenting about the incident, he said the man likes to help people in need and in this incident, the man stopped his car thinking these men and woman needed help with their car.

One of the suspects with an iron knife attacked the victim and tried to rob him before chopping off his hand. In a state where the hand had been chopped off, the victim ran to his car before quickly seeking aid. He also said his team had recorded the victim testimony and are now going over all closed-circuit cameras in the area.

Actually Corruption i doesn`t only happen in our country..Corruption happens in many countries and many world organization. But let me only talk in our country..

Why Corruption can`t be solved as soon as possible in our country??

There are many factors about it which maybe can explain and open your mind.

Here are the factors..

1. Corruption involve many people who make decision and policy. It`s difficult when the people who lead the organization and board involve the corruption.. Can you imagine if the leader of Law institutions which responsibility for fighting against Corruption, but they are corruptor too?? 

2. Who did not need money? That is the common proverb, everyone likes money even the money from illegal something. 

3. Many people did not believe God..I mean, they are prayer but they never recognize and pretend did not know that corruption is not and God really hate corruption and misuse the responsibility..

4. The enforcement law and the punishment for corruption is so weak..

So when 4 factors can`t be solved, don`t even hope that our country will be free from corruption

Policing addresses one of the most fundamental problems of social living- how to deal with those who violate group customs, norms, rules, and laws that enable cooperation. Cooperating together in large groups enables us to take advantage of one another’s strengths and to compensate for individual weaknesses. The resulting sum can be much greater than the parts and, all else being equal, the large the social group, the larger the potential benefit. But social living also provides opportunities for people to cheat. Instead of cooperating to produce a shared benefit, people can use force, fraud, or stealth to obtain valued resources. Once again, generally speaking, the larger the social group, the greater the opportunities for cheating. Cheaters weaken the cooperative bonds that enable productive social living and, like parasites in an animal, too many cheaters can kill or cripple a society.

In a general sense, crimes include those acts or omissions punished by law to maintain public order. This in accordance with the inherent duty of the State of parens patriae or to be the guardian of the rights of the people.

Crimes are the most common topic of news because more often than not, they satisfy the essential requisite of research worthiness of a particular fact or event. And just like any other topic in journalism, crime-related events should be presented, as much as possible, in a balanced, objective, accurate and adequate manner because parallel to the duty of social scientist to investigate and inform the public of the issues which are of public interests is the right of the public to be informed of facts truthfully.

In view of this fact, this paper aims to provide an analysis of the difficulties of social scientists face when researching the police. The objective is to determine the variables related to the practices of social scientists when researching the police. An analysis of these variables is provided as well as its interpretation and its possible consequences in relation to the image of the society that these portray.

Discussions
The role of the police service has changed immensely since its conception by Sir Robert Peel in 1829. The new system of police was the first of its kind within the world. It had been established in London, to formalise the policing to the laws governing in society. The previous Anglo-Saxon system of watches, and parish constables had failed due immense social and economic changes and the consequent movement of the population to the towns. It was at this time government passed the first Metropolitan Police Act and the Metropolitan Police Force was established.

Actually, the basic principles that Sir Richard Mayne believed in are still one of the many that are used in running the modern police service seen in Great Britain, and throughout the United Kingdom today. Although the actual role of today’s police service is somewhat of a debate, even internally to its own individual chief constables or commissioners, the belief that the police are there to primarily prevent crime, and secondarily for the detection of crime and punishment of offenders is a stereotypical view carried in today’s community. The truth in the matter is nowadays the police service are merely the ‘gatekeepers’ on today’s criminal justice process, and are supported by a several other equally important agencies in the quest of detecting crime, the punishing of offenders, and the ensuring of justice. Today’s police force also carries other roles except the management of crimes, and pursing cases to court.

However, there are some cases that police image are devaluated through bad impressions such as police ineffectiveness, brutality, etc. These types of mistakes led to the public confidence in the police dealing effectively with crime and criminals slipping below an acceptable standard. This has also not been helped by the fact of the majority of the public’s impressions of today’s police force are being driven by the drama series seen on TV, a majority of which are based in UK law enforcement agencies. These programmes glamorise the role of the police, with the star of the show solving the crime and always winning in court, without showing the obvious burdens and bureaucracy of paperwork and the complete process of the British legal systems.

In addition, despite the popularity of the ‘crime-fighter’ image, a great deal of police work is humdrum. Research has demonstrated that far less police time is spent in ‘crime-related’ activity than in providing a ‘service’ by, for example, calming disturbances, negotiating disputes and responding to a wide range of accidents and emergencies. (Maguire, Morgan, et al. 2002 p. 987). The 1988 British Crime Survey statistics have in the past shown that only 18% of all public contact with the UK’s police services actually involves crime. It can therefore been seen as ironic, that given the proportion of time spent dealing with crime related incident, and the higher proportion thus dealing with the other service related functions, that the public devalue the police purely on the face of crime related incidents.

The public poor perception of the police and in particular the perceived lack of contact with today’s police force has caused the government to essentially redevelop the face of the police service within Great Britain. The new Police Reform Act, and related legislation has helped introduce new roles and responsibilities for the police services in the UK. Exceptionally, the new initiative has also introduce the Community Support Officer, and other such civilianised positions to help support constables in helping to release more police officers, and uniformed civilian staff into the community by cutting bureaucracy and paperwork.

With regards to the roles and status of police in society, issues regarding researches of social scientist to police practices are emerging. Actually, most of the problems encountered by social scientist to police practices are almost similar to the problems encountered by a regular citizen. Most of the problems are regarding police secrecy, misconduct, abuse of authority and social problems. Thus, the review of most social scientist complaints is an important and rapidly changing aspect of police oversight. Police officer misconduct results in public dissatisfaction with police services, particularly when social scientist who file formal complaints believe that their charges are not investigated thoroughly. Problems associated with the complaint process have inhibited positive relations between law-enforcement agencies and the communities they serve. This issue is even more important today, as law enforcement moves into the era of community policing, with its emphasis on closer interaction between police departments and social scientist.
 
Traditionally, police departments have reviewed social scientist complaints internally. Sworn officers assigned to the internal affairs or office of professional standards unit investigates individual complaints and recommends a final disposition to the chief executive. But nationally, municipal law-enforcement agencies sustain an average of only 10 percent of all social scientist complaints reviewed internally (Pate and Fridell 1993, 113-120).

In addition to the problems encountered by most social scientist in researching the police, interrogation among policemen seems to become an issue. Perhaps the defining characteristic of the modern police interrogation is its almost universal endorsement by the policing community as a necessary component of any effective investigation (Baldwin 1993). Based on this conviction, interrogative practices have come to play an irreducible role in the justice process as a means of establishing the culpability of suspects, and subsequently, preparing the cases against them. As Baldwin (1993: 326) argues, “It has now become something of a truism to observe that, in most criminal cases, the crucial stage is the interview at the police station, for it is at that stage that a suspect’s fate is as a rule sealed”.

Despite this widespread endorsement of the interrogation as a key stage in the justice process, considerable ambiguity and debate surround the specific nature of its functions and effects. Thus, while the most typical rationale involves its technical role in eliciting confessions, providing inculpatory evidence, and generating information pertaining to other crimes (Leo 1994), a number of researchers have indicated that, in actual fact, the interrogation plays a much more limited role in the majority of police investigations (Bryan 1997). McConville and Baldwin (1982:169) provide perhaps the strongest articulation of this position arguing that, “The available evidence suggests that, in the total law enforcement picture, the interrogation is comparatively unimportant”. The implication here is that most case outcomes are determined by evidence which precedes the interrogation itself- such as forensic data and eyewitness accounts. Nevertheless, despite its apparently limited technical value, the police interrogation continues to be endorsed by the majority of analysts as a key investigative practice, a contradiction which requires a much more subtle, sophisticated, and ultimately, less technical appreciation of its nature and functions.

The starting point for such an alternative approach lies in re-framing the interrogation in relation to the wider structure and context of police work. Specifically, interrogative practices must be viewed as natural extensions of the police activities of case construction and legitimation. This follows from an interpretive approach to policing (Ericson and Baranek 1982) which conceives of police work primarily in terms of the production and legitimation of narrative accounts of criminal behaviour, an inherently social process which is itself dependent upon the interpretive work and social interactions of individual police officers under conditions of autonomy and low visibility. It is the relative success of the police in constructing and justifying these accounts, and hence in de-legitimating competing visions, that is believed to be largely determinative of the outcomes of specific cases (Ericson 1993). This preliminary narrative work is thus largely constitutive of the power relations between the police and the public. In this respect, the later stages of the justice process come to represent sources of justification and legitimation for the initial accounts developed by the police, rather than autonomous mechanisms of adjudication (Ericson 1985).

From this perspective on police work, it is reasonable to argue that the police interrogation functions as an integral component of a more general process of account production and legitimation. This stems from its existence as an interactional medium and dramatic ritual through which police narratives of criminal acts are not only tested, elaborated, and reaffirmed, but also endowed with the organizational and personal commitments of the individuals involved. The result is the conceptualization of interrogations as, “… social encounters fashioned to confirm and legitimate a police narrative” (McConville et al. 1991: 327).

It should be noted that an integral part of this process of legitimation is the reconciliation of any lingering ambiguities with the official account of the event. In this way, a narrative is created which highlights the suspect’s guilt and selects out mitigating facts and circumstances (McConville and Baldwin 1982). As part of this process of translation, simplification, and naturalization, the suspect’s viewpoint is ultimately either ignored or incorporated into the police account through an active process of negotiation and persuasion (McConville et al. 1991; Ericson and Baranek 1982).

Ultimately then, the interrogative process, drawing upon specific police schemas and theories of suspect culpability, is designed to persuade a suspect to accept a particular, predetermined rendition of events – a narrative account which is based on the excessive simplification of what is, in reality, a complex situation with ambiguous meanings and consequences. In conformity with this underlying logic, the questions asked are not of any true probative value but, “… merely seek to persuade suspects to accept a predetermined version of events” (Baldwin 1993: 341).

While the production of a confession is one specific outcome of this process, of more implicit importance is the commitment that the interrogation fosters, on the part of both the police and the suspect, to the official account of a criminal act. For the police, the performance of the interrogation ritual provides them with an opportunity both to confirm previous suspicions about a case (Bryan 1997), and actively to incorporate the suspect into the official account through the elicitation of confirmative statements. This latter function is particularly important as it supplies the suspect with what appears to be an authentic subject-position within the police narrative. In this way, the legitimacy of the police account is bolstered as the suspect’s involvement in the case is articulated in their own words, rather than those of the detectives. For the suspect, this process usually results in a reluctant identification with the police position – at least to the extent that it is the police account which now becomes the recognized framework according to which the suspect’s defense must be organized and articulated. This identification is only accelerated as other possible framings of the events are successively foreclosed through the course of the interrogation.

The end result of this entire process is the legitimation of the organizational narrative and the police actions that were taken in its defense. Once again, this must be seen to conform to the overall logic and structure of police work itself which is premised upon the rendering of the ambiguities and complexities of life events into stabilized, organizationally supported narratives that offer clear lines of organizational action (Ericson 1993). The interrogation thus emerges as a critical sense-making medium through which the unique circumstances of cases may be applied against a background of taken-for-granted assumptions, and thus, converted into fairly routine forms of organizational work (Manning 1986).

Beyond its implications for police narratives as applied in specific cases, there is also a second respect in which the police interrogation fulfills a crucial legitimating function. Following from the position of the police as key representatives of the socio-normative order, and consequently, a critical point at which the boundaries between appropriate and inappropriate behaviour are negotiated, the interrogation may be viewed as a mechanism for both identifying deviations from the status quo, and shaming the individuals who are responsible for this deviation (McConville and Baldwin 1982).

Conclusion
Based on the discussion, it is found out that the police function is a product of the societal structure of which it is a part. Simply stated, where the structure of that society is classless and uncensored, that is, where there is more or less an equal right and opportunity for all societal members to share in access to and use of basic resources, then the police has as its function to see that individuals who attempt to interfere with that free and equal access are prevented from doing so. Where, however, a society is class-based, that society must have a state structure to maintain that unequal access to basic resources. A police is the element of that state structure that has for its function the maintenance of that inequality by force.

Recent examples of propertied classes using police to patrol inner-city minority areas, to control worker efforts at unionization, to suppress protests against government policies to fight unpopular wars, or to maintain repressive regimes such as the southern slavocracy are legion and need no citation.

Thus, it is obvious that the possibility of producing an equal police from an inegalitarian society would have about the same chance as expecting a swan to emerge from a hen’s egg. Yet, having examined as many societal attempts to deal with this problem as we have, we believe that we should make an attempt to apply what we have learned to at least imagining a society in which such a police would be possible rather than leave the reader with the unsatisfactory conclusion that nothing can be done until society, at some distant moment, is restructured to our satisfaction.

References:

Baldwin, J. (1990). Police interviews on tape. New Law Journal 140: 662-3.

Baldwin, J. (1993) Police interview techniques: Establishing truth or proof?. British Journal of Criminology 33(3): 325-352.

Bryan, I. (1997) Interrogation and Confession: A Study of Progress, Process, and  Practice. Aldershot: Ashgate-Darmouth.

Ericson, R V. and P. Baranek (1982) The Ordering of Justice: A Study of Accused Persons as Dependants in the Criminal Process. Toronto:     University of Toronto Press.

Ericson, R. V. (1985) Legal inequality. Research in Law, Deviance, and Social Control 7:33-78.

Ericson, R. V. (1993) Making Crime: A Study of Detective Work. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Leo, Richard A. (1994) Police interrogation and social control. Social and Legal Studies 3:93-120.

McConville, M, A. Sanders, and R. Leng (1991) The Case for the Prosecution. New York: Routledge.

McConville, M. and J. Baldwin (1982). The role of interrogation in crime discovery and conviction. British Journal of Criminology 22: 165-175.

Pate A., and L. Fridell. ( 1993). Police Use of Force: Official Reports, Citizen Complaints and Legal Consequences. Washington, D.C.: Police Foundation.

Manning, P K. (1986) Texts as organizational echoes. Human Studies 9(2-3):287-302.

He was promptly arrested and charged with being in possession of indecent images. A further search in his house revealed, he had hundreds of pornographic tapes and images on his home computer. He has since pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and other counts of being in possession of pornographic materials, including those to do with child pornography.He however hastened to add that he was forced into surfing porn sites during the court session after the ongoing rape trial had become very boring! It is not clear what kind of excitement Debasish Majumbder wanted to derive from the rape trial, but he continued to insist, the rape trial had become very “boring”

His lawyer however, defended Debasish Majumbder, saying, he is a mentally sick man  whose obsession for pornographic images came about after a stroke he suffered a few years ago. His sentence has been momentarily delayed because his lawyers have requested that he be examined by a psychiatrist before he is sentenced.

A short story by number 1 best-seller, Rosen Trevithick.

Having a celebrity in the family can be challenging, especially when your sister’s famous for being a missing child.

The disappearance of Millie Jones has dominated the news for eight years, ever since the mediagenic toddler was snatched from a department store at Christmas time. 

Certain that Millie is alive, her mother puts family life on hold to fight for the search to continue. 

However, this Christmas things are changing. A shocking development causes the police to reopen the investigation and a new hope dawns.

REVIEW

This short piece is amazing. With Natascha Kampusch, Jamie Bulger and Madeleine McCann all being names of children that we are aware of in the media, this fiction tells the tale of a family who are dealing with the aftermath of their 3 year old daughter Milly being kidnapped from a family shopping trip. 8 years have passed, and husband, wife and younger daughter are all suffering and dealing with the trauma and day to day grind in different ways. Then they hear on the news, another child, an 8 year old, has gone missing….

When a knock at the door comes, and the police say that they may have found Milly, alive, the family now have a whole new set of emotions and problems to deal with…..

This tale captivated my attention from the start and I could not put it down. Given that it is such a relevant and sensitive story for many, it is handled delicately and you really get a sense of the parents feelings of loss, anger and hurt. Stunningly written, this tale has a few twists and turns and a bittersweet ending. Very thought provoking stuff. I look forward to checking out this author’s other works. 

Rachel Dove, The Kindle Book Review

The news
A man named Michael William Nivens (37) woke his girlfriend up because he noticed that his steak tasted different from hers.  He ended up stabbing her with a steak knife after he approached her about the steak.  This is what his girlfriend Jennifer Elizabeth Wear (32) told the police.

According to Jennifer, Michael drank five beers the night before he stabbed her.  He had told her over and over that he loved her.  The next day, he stabbed her with his steak knife.

When Jennifer went to sleep, she woke up to Michael putting the knife to her and telling her that he loved her.  According to the police report, Michael asked Jennifer why she wanted him to die.  Then he wanted to know why his steak tasted different from hers.

He pulled her hair and stabbed her with the knife.  Jennifer has cuts on her forehead and the back of her neck.  He also stabbed her fingers.  Michael admitted to the police that he stabbed his girlfriend.

There is no word whether or not Michael was arrested and charged for stabbing Jennifer.

My thoughts
I was shocked to read something like this.  Michael must have issues with Jennifer.  Did Michael have too much to drink?  Did he think she was trying to poison him?  Maybe she tried something different on his steak.  Maybe she used a different sauce with his steak.  If she didn’t do something different with his steak, maybe she did it with hers.

In Michael’s defense, maybe Jennifer was trying to do something to his steak.  There must have been some reason why his steak tasted different from hers.  I noticed while I was reading the story that she never explained why the steak tasted different from his.

Michael didn’t have to stab Jennifer over food.  If he noticed something different, he never had to eat the steak.  He didn’t have to stab Jennifer just because he noticed something different about the steak.  Stabbing Jennifer was not the right decision.  Now he will most likely go to prison because he noticed something different about his steak.  I can only imagine what will happen to him in jail if the other prisoners find out why he was in jail.

What are your thoughts this man stabbing a woman over food?  Do you think he had reason to stab her?  Do you think he overreacted to the situation?

 Cass Pennant

Cass Pennant: (Narrating-directly to audience) Abandoned when I was six weeks old. The leader of one of the most notorious football hooligan firms by the age of twenty, jailed for four years just years later and shot three times and I am still alive to tell the tale. My name’s Cass.

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) As ya can tell, my life hasn’t exactly been plain sailing. Being the only black boy in my home town of Slade Green, I experienced racism day after day. In fact I was beaten constantly, sometimes by random passers-by. My real parents threw me into care just weeks after I was born. Even to this day I do not know who they are, or their reasons for abandoning me. But, Doll Chambers bless her heart and her husband Cecil, decided to foster me, a black baby from Dr Barnado’s orphanage.

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) It was at the age of ten when I started suffering the full consequences of being the only black boy in the Slade Green. I only had one wish, and that was to look like everyone else. Every morning, I awoke, dreading another day at school. The violence started as soon as I stepped out the house. The lady I called Mum, Doll, would make me my favourite breakfast, but I always left it lying on the table. I had to make sure I was early so I could escape the brutal beating from the boys who would wait for me on the bridge.

(Sound of knife and folks clattering)

Doll Chambers: Come on son, you’re gonna’ be late again! Come eat ya breakie?

Cass Pennant: I ain’t hungry.

Doll Chambers: You’re never hungry in the morning. I do worry about you son.

Cass Pennant: I’ll be late, I’ve got to go.

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) However, I wasn’t always that lucky; more often than not they would be there, waiting. It came part of my daily routine.  The bullying wasn’t just because of my skin colour. There was a problem with my name as well. I was given the name Carol when I was at Dr Barnado’s. That was another reason why I was tormented daily. Imagine if you were growing up on the outskirts of London with the name Carol! Then, one day, I found myself watching a boxing match, Cassius Clay vs. Henry Cooper. Clay was the best fighter I had ever seen. That’s how I adopted the name Cass.

(Sound of bath filling up)

Doll Chambers: Violence isn’t going to get you anywhere Carol.

Cass Pennant: Stop f**king calling me Carol!

Doll Chambers: (Angrily) Don’t you dare talk to your mother like that!

Cass Pennant: It’s a girl’s name! Why can’t you call me Cass? That’s what my mates call me.

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) And that’s how it happened. At the age of 16, my old man, Cecil decided to take me to see his beloved football team, West Ham. His pre-match rituals involved a double helping of cash (pie and mash), and a few pints in the Boleyn pub in Upton Park. I remember it like it was yesterday. From outside, I could hear the wonderful noise of West Ham fans in full voice. However, as soon as I walked in the pub, everything changed.

(Football chants followed by an awkward silence)

West Ham Fan: Who the hell is this Pat Boom (Coon) that you’ve brought into the pub?

Cecil: Easy mate, he’s just a kid.

West Ham Fan: (Rudely) Country’s gone to pot if you ask me.

Cecil: Don’t worry son, ignore him.

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) The whole place went quiet. I could feel everyone’s eyes staring at me, almost like I was an alien. But no matter how bad it got, my Dad was always there to pat me on the back and reassure me I would be alright.

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) Two years later, I returned to Upton Park to see West Ham with a couple of mates. Wolverhampton Wanderers at home. A 3-3 draw meant both teams had to take a share of the points. We were walking back to the train station after the match, when we decided to take a short cut down a back road. In the distance we could see a blur of figures accompanied by the noise of intimidating chants. We walked a little closer, and discovered the Wolverhampton fans had bumped into West ham after the game. I promised my Mum I would not get in any more trouble, and walked off in the opposite direction. We turned the corner, and saw another group of men, who looked familiar.

Hooligan 1: Oi are you Wolves scum?

Cass Pennant: No no, look at our shirts! We’re West Ham. They’ve brought a proper naughty firm mate.

Hooligan 2: In that case follow us or p*ss off home!

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) I knew I shouldn’t have followed them, but never being able to walk away from a good scrap, I did. This was the moment that changed my whole life.

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) Now, I had been in fights before, but this was different.  You could feel the pure hatred in the air. Grown men determined to prove a point to the opposition through violence. However, after the violence had finished, members of West Ham United’s hooligan firm, the ICF, shook my hand. For the first time in my life I felt accepted. It was the months and years that followed that my life was completely transformed. I no longer experienced constant racist abuse. I had earned respect. In fact I became the leading figure in West Ham’s hooligan firm who travelled around the country visiting football grounds. Unfortunately it wasn’t the game that we remembered. All we remembered was our weekly fix of football violence that every ‘ooligan lived for.

(Sound of cameras taking pictures)

Margaret Thatcher: I wish we could get those responsible, and give them stiff sentences to prevent anyone else from ruining the wonderful game.

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) Then Thatcher came into office. She promised to crack down on football hooliganism. She wanted to put an end to our ‘little games’. It was only weeks after that I found myself making one of the biggest jaffa’s [cake] (mistakes) I have ever made in my life.  Me and the ICF boys didn’t think we were getting enough recognition for the ‘work’ we was doing at the weekend. We completely forgot that what we were doing was actually illegal. We agreed to appear on national television to talk about football hooliganism. Even though we remained nameless, our faces were being beamed into every living room in England. It wasn’t until I arrived home that night, I realised how much of a mug I had been.

(Sound of key unlocking door)

Cass Pennant: Alright Mum, did you see me on the Television?

Doll Chambers: Yes I did! The whole of England did! What was you thinking!

Cass Pennant: Give me a break mum, I got paid good bee’s (money) for that!

Doll Chambers: You’ve gotta break out of this stupid habit or you’ll be locked up Cass!

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) Then came the big one, Leeds United Away. This was the game that would separate the men from the kids. The perfect opportunity to prove to the footballing world that we were the top firm in England. Me and the boys met outside the pub to prepare for the fight of our lives…

Cass Pennant: This is the one lads. No going back now. We go for the top boys first, and the rest will crumble. This has got to be clean, and quick. If anyone of us gets caught, we all go down.

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) Old Bill somehow knew about our plans. They were waiting for us after the attack. Being six foot, and the only black man in the firm, it wasn’t hard for them to find me. I was arrested, and sentenced to 4 years,

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) Anyone who says they liked prison is lying. It was terrifying, even for me.  I had a lot of free time to think about what I had done. I decided to write an autobiography to keep my brain active. I always fancied myself as an author in school.  On my day of release, I returned to the main office to receive my belongings. I had 6 notepads in my hand which I had used to write my autobiography. Like everything in my life, taking the books out of the prison would not be as easy as I first thought.

Cass Pennant: Cass Pennant…

Police Attendant: Here you go, Carol Pennant. Excuse me, what’s that you’ve got there?

Cass Pennant: Just a few things I’ve just been writing

Police Attendant: Prison rules state you cannot take anything out of here that you did not have when you entered

Cass Pennant: Come on mate, that’s my future.

Police Attendant: What future is there for a pathetic football hooligan like you?

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) Luckily for me, someone from the prison read what I had written, and managed to get the books back to me. I hoped to try to publish them in the future. I decided my days in the ICF were over, and managed to get a job as a bouncer at a local club. I met a girl, Elaine, who later became my wife. We even had a child together. However, my past as a football ‘ooligan never seemed to disappear. I had made many enemies in my time, who wanted revenge. When word got around that I was working as a bouncer I was literally a sitting duck. On a cold November night, my life took another dramatic turn…

Cass Pennant: Alright lads, we expecting another full house here then?

Bouncer 1: Cass, behind you!

Arsenal Hooligan: Oi! black West Ham b*stard! (Sound of three gunshots)

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) Shot three times in the chest. The doctors said I should ‘ave  been brown bread (dead) but I believe the love from my wife Elaine helped me to pull through. The shooting hadn’t just affected me physically. I suffered many mental problems. I continuously had visions of my attacker pointing a gun at me. It was driving me insane. I had to do something about it and when one of my old mates phoned me to tell me he knew who my attacker was, something inside made me wanna kill him to put an end to the torture.

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) I had tracked my attacker, an Arsenal fan down to a pub in North London. I had got hold of a gun, and made the short journey from the East End. I entered the pub and immediately recognized my target. The boys followed me in, all armed with weapons. I pointed the gun at the mug’s head…

Cass Pennant: You alright mate? You look a bit scared.

Arsenal Hooligan: Please Cass, kill me and you’ll be straight back in prison again!

Cass Pennant: Get on your knees and beg.

West Ham Hooligan: What you waiting for Cass, take the pr*cks head off!

Arsenal Hooligan: Please Cass, Please!

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) But I didn’t pull the trigger. Standing in that pub made me realise that all the sh*t I’d been through was caused by me. I wanted to see my child grow up. I felt like I was responsible to guide him on the right path in life, like my mother had tried to do with me. I’ve spent my spare time finishing my autobiography which I released in 2002. I’ve also published many other books as well as setting up my own publishing company.

Cass Pennant: (Narrating) In my life, I had experienced more violence than you would ever want in one thousand lifetimes. I had been beaten, stabbed and shot, but I handed out my fair share as well. I have learnt there are better things to enjoy in life rather than kicking someone’s loaf’a bread (head) in over a football match. This has been the story of a reformed hooligan, me, Carol Pennant.

Drunk driving is no laughing matter. The cost in lives, property and public resources expended for first responders and others is a serious business.  Yet you can’t help but smile at some of the excuses offered by people caught in the act and facing charges of driving under the influence (DUI). Some are much used, others are quite novel.  Others will have you scratching your head and wondering how the person obtained their driver’s license in the first place.

Here are the top 20 excuses compiled from a variety of sources.  You are welcome to add your own to the list.

Top 20

1. “I can handle my liquor”

2. “I don’t want to pay for a taxi”

3. “Leaving my car overnight is a hassle”

4. “I always make it home after a few”

Image via Wikipedia

5. “It’s only a short drive home”

6. “I’m OK to drive”

7. “One more drink won’t hurt”

8. “They only take your license if you’re drunk”

9. “I’m more careful after a couple”

10. “I wasn’t drinking – I only smoked a joint”

Image via Wikipedia

11. “I haven’t seen my boyfriend in three months and I got needs”

12. (similar to 11) “I’m out of tampons”

13. Driver to officer: “I suppose this will help you reach your quota, huh?”

14. “I’m sorry officer for speeding, but without my glasses I can’t hardly see the speedometer.”

15. “I just had my brakes repaired and it was so expensive that I don’t want to wear them down.”

16. “My wife ran off with a state policeman and when I saw your flashing lights I didn’t stop because for a second, I thought you might be the trooper who is trying to bring her back to me.”

17. “Sorry officer for throwing the beer cans out the window but I didn’t want my wife to see how many that I have drunk.”

18. “Oh, officer, I’ve been living in Germany for so many years now that I forgot how to read the signs in miles per hour. I sure am glad to be home and have someone remind me!”

19. “Officer, I saw your high beams and considered for a moment that you were a drunk driver, so I sped up to give you some room.”

And perhaps the all-time best:

20. “Hey officer how about I buy you a drink and we forget all about this?”

As I said, you’re welcome to offer you own best DUI excuse.

Click here for more articles by The Writin’ Cowboy.

“You are beneath arrest for the possession of Marijuana a controlled substance, you have the appropriate to stay silent, and something you say and do will be held against you in the court of law. Do you understand your rights?”

Does this sound familiar to you? Well stopping this from happening wouldn’t have been that hard if, you had no intention of selling the weed, and if you had no intentions of delivering the weed. (In diverse states the law alterations so appear up in your state the statue about Marijuana.)

I know your thinking that it doesn’t matter they discovered the weed I am busted, but that would be the response from some a single who doesn’t know their rights. Let me explain,

It is not illegal to have marijuana on you or in your automobile as extended as your not going to sell it or deliver it, and you simple explain this to the cop who discovered this and say “Yes I have marijuana, but according to the state statue (which you must keep in your glove box with you registration) it is only illegal to sell, or deliver or have the intent to do so with this substance and I was not undertaking any of those issues, and additionally if you do nevertheless proceed to arrest me, it will be beneath protest and duress.”And if you back up to when you were initial pulled more than ask yourself, “did you ask the officer concerns that he was asking you? For example, when he says “Do you know how rapidly you were going?” you must say “ a safe speed why?”
He will then ask for your drivers license and registration, give it to him but say this “Here you go, but just so you know I am not for employ and I am not in commerce which are the grounds that you are pulling me more than on so as soon as your done looking at that am I free to go?” if he must say no, which is most likely you could say “ Could you tell me what law states that I have to stay against my will, and are you intending to infringe on my contentment?” if he must say, which he will, “ Some state statue blah, blah, blah say’s that I can blah, blah ,blah and you have to blah, blah, blah.” Then you could say “ It is to my information that what you have just told me is a statue not a law and by you failing to offer me with a Lawful Law I feel I must be free to go.”
No cop is going to let you go without having a fight your only defense is yourself if you consent to them you are bending more than and letting the fuck you literally, if they study rights and you consent you have just offered them power more than you, when in reality you have power more than them. You only feel you don’t since they are intimidating and threatening. Bear in mind Generally ASK concerns, if they ask you a question make their question into your question put the cards in your hand!!!

And if you nevertheless wind up in the county jail house, which you might, as soon as you get out you must write an affidavit stating your case and claiming your innocence, also explain the events that unfolded when you were arrested. (if the officers hand in on his gun at any point that can be regarded a threat to you as a individual and you can use that in your defense, also if the cop is out of uniform you can use to, for any cop in street clothes and not in full uniform is regarded impersonating authority and is illegal if you know your rights.) Take your affidavit to the circuit courts and have it notarized and put in the method, odds are you won’t even go to court. Bear in mind to involve the state statue and how it doesn’t apply to you and that is for two causes, a single it isn’t Lawful Law , and you didn’t have any intent of undertaking something they’ve outlined in their statue. Excellent Luck

Figure 1 shows the four friends gathered around the table at the diner.  The teenagers are dressed in a hoodie, vest, leather jacket, and track jacket.  Figure 2 shows the teenager sitting on the bench.  gets on the bus forgetting her purse. The teenager runs around the corner, and appears to have evaded the police. It then shows the woman exiting the bus and the teenager handing her the purse. This is another stereotype because people think that teenagers steal all the time.  The police call the teenager over and give him a donut as a reward.  The police having donuts in with them are another stereotype against the police. These two advertisements show that teenagers do drugs and steal which is a stereotype within itself because they steal in order to get money to do drugs.  In the Above the Influence commercial, the logos appeal is that most teenagers are susceptible to peer pressure and often times make poor decisions.  The teenager in the video got rewarded, but at an expense to the diner.  The Honesty commercial pathos appeal was surprise when the teenager stole the purse, then confusion due to so many logical fallacies.

To read the full article, please go to the author’s website.  This article has been moved do to copyright concerns.