Total Goofs: Bulgaria Youth Hate Books, Best Versed in Pop Folk
About one in every three Bulgarians, aged under 19, does not know what it means to square a number, while a whopping 40% say they have never heard of the creator of the theory of evolution Charles Darwin and another 20% have no idea what the mathematical constant "pi" stands for.
History and geography are not among the strengths of Bulgaria's youths, 60% of whom believe that the United States fought against Russia in the Second World War and another 30% can't find the state of Andorra on the map.
In sharp contrast to these huge gaps in school knowledge, almost everyone of the respondents knows well the famed Roma gay and popfolk star Azis and about 40% of them consider reading books to be a meaningless waste of time.
The quality of life of Bulgaria's youth, however, is constantly improving - 85% of them own mobile phones, while 40% have computers at home, the survey says. Access to education, computer literacy, foreign language proficiency and travels abroad is easy and widespread.
In terms of minorities, the Roma are constantly increasing their share of Bulgaria's youth and are expected to account for half of it in just twenty-five years.
- » Helicopter Made an Emergency Landing in the Yard of a Winery in Svishtov (Video)
- » National Library Plans to Attract Young Readers via Digitisation
- » Bulgarians Find Life more Unfair and Unhappy Compared to most Europeans
- » Bulgarians are the Last in the EU when it Comes to Spending Money on Books
- » Bears Saved Near Village of Daspat Are Under 24-Hour Surveillance
- » A Man was Found Shot in an Underground Car Park in Burgas
Cheer up! Nobody's an expert in everything. All I claim is competence in a profession I was well trained for. In "my day", the military services didn't have anywhere near the number of lawyers they have now, especially the Navy, which couldn't possibly have a lawyer on each ship. Therefore the Naval Justice School trained legal enlisted people in the functions which the lawyers now perform. We had to handle the whole schmear, from the initial report, through the investigations, all the pre-trial paperwork, the trial itself, and then all the post-trial paperwork. We were trained in each individual article of the military justice code, one by one, with all of the elements of proof required, and the necessary (and sometimes tricky) wording necessary to make a conviction possible.
(Example: Take a larceny case. Someone may take something from someone else without committing a crime. The trick here is that the indictment must read "did unlawfully take...." If you don't specify that the taking was unlawful, you'll lose.) Same thing with murder. The indictment must specifiy "did unlawfully kill...", or words to that effect. I can't guarantee that this somewhat archaic language is still required, but I should think it is.
Even better: A sailor from one ship swipes something from another ship and brings it back with him. You can't charge him with larceny. Why not? Because for larceny you have to specifiy that the item was taken from its rightful owner. Since it was government property and only transferred from one ship to another, it hadn't been removed from its owner. The best you could charge was wrongful appropriation, which only requires that it be taken from someone having a greater right to possession.
It's true that I finished my career out as a court reporter, where I didn't have all the extraneous work to do, but I was still well enough grounded that I could (and did) point erroneous indictments out to the judges prior to trial, which didn't endear me to the young lawyers at all, but kept egg off of the judge's face.
I may be wrong (again!) but I was talking about a little girl who disappeared and the lawmerchant saying there had to be a body for a murder charge.
According to my dictionary, "Latin, habeas corpus literally means вЂњyou shall have the body" I was referring to the Latin, not the writ and the idea that a body does not have to be produced for a murder charge.
Corpus delicti has nothing to do with the body of a little girl who has been missing for many months!
I am never the expert when it comes to Latin!!
I think we agree (?). I think the ceation of the Department of Homeland Security was one big-time mistake. Border control had been in the bailiwick of the Department of the Interior since it was founded, and should have stayed there. The last thing American taxpayers needed was a whole new level of bureaucracy, especially at cabinet level, which immediately started flexing its muscles and making things difficult for everyone, just as OSHA did when it was founded.
From my viewpoint, DHS has gone completely paranoid.
I had to go look it up myself. The proper spelling is "corpus delicti", and it means "the body of the crime", i.e. the substance or fundamental facts of an offense. (Dictionary of Foreign Terms, 2d Ed. )
Please note that here, too, the reference is not to a corpse, although a corpse would be the "corpus delicti" of a murder case.
To be honest, anyone would be excused confusing Habeas Corpus with other things. Since the Bush administration did away with it, it's become a sort of a mythical creature. Everyone knows it existed at some point but no one knows what it looks like. :-)
*Sits back and waits for the flamewar*
Apropos religion, you have no idea how right you are! I HAVE had personal experience with spirits, and believe me, they were no hallucination! It scared me to death. There is no "hearsay" about it. There were other witnesses present, so I know it wasn't anything I "deramed up" myself.
As I've repeatedly said on this forum, the people criticizing the Church through me--and I'm no exemplary member--are doing so from a position of pitiful ignorance of how the Church works.
LEAVE THIS WORK TO THE PROFESSIONALS!
Habeas Corpus, correctly translated, is, "let you have the body", and refers to giving the prisoner up to his lawyer or other custodian filing the writ.
It has NOTHING AT ALL to do with corpses. What you're thinking of is "corpus delecti", an entirely different thing.
Now you can go to trial without a corpus delecti, but this, again, has nothing to do with habeas corpus
And before you come up again, trying to teach me my own profession, think twice.
It's just possible that I was properly trained by a good school.
Oh did I say writ of Habeas corpus? NO!! I said Habeas corpus and was using the Latin and that means " [We command that] you have the body"
Why oh why do you think you are the professional?
A professional is someone who "A worker required to possess a large body of knowledge derived from extensive academic study (usually tertiary), with the training almost always formalized".
That is not you, Bill! You were and are not a professional! You were a pointy headed, pencil pushing bureaucrat who thought he was very important and did a job anyone could do with TRAINING, not education!
Another legal word for you: Hearsay;
Your faith and religion is all hearsay!! "Everything you call proof and all your knowledge is based on "unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge" Everything about EVERY religion is based on the same. It is all based on unverified information that is learned from someone else. All any of you (Religious nuts)have is "Faith" and never knowledge!
Unless you had lunch with your God and then I apologize, because then you are just suffering from a hallucination!
Then you are just
There once was a man from Nantucket... Oh wait, that wasn't the story.
The was this guy who went to live in a new city. He fell in love with the servant girl of the family he was staying with and, him being quite attractive, she responded favorably. One day, the girl was messing with the lady of the house's potions and turned her lover into a donkey. That same night, before the servant could turn him back into a human he was taken by a gang who robbed the house and forced to carry their ill-gotten gains. He managed to escape and travelled and suffered throughout Italy before he was turned back into a human by a priest who asked him to live a good life.
there was this wealfy business man,who owned a factory in East London.
He kept a flat in West End and was visiting his family only on the weekends.
The family was living in a huge villa in the country side.
One day he fell in love with one of his workers... a young and innocent girl from Wales.
He promissed to mary her and as naive as she was ,she presented him with two kids.
Years passed by and the business affairs of the manufacturer were not going well.
He filed for bankruptcy.
Meanwile everybody was wondering where the young Harriet was(his mistress).
He was insisting she left him for Paris or some other place in France and has not been returning for more than a year.
One night a fellow,who used to work in the factory of Mr.Businessman,saw him on the street,close to the warehouse where Mr.Busines man was keeping the remains of his production),
trying to put two big boxes into a car.
"Come on,Spencer, help me to take these parcels to the house of my brother !" he said.
The parcels were very heavy and the young fellow was currious what his boss wanted to transport....
he was thinking:"Clothing could be sooooo heavy!"
When his boss returned to the werehouse,he opened one of the boxes and his hear stood up!
There was the chopped head of a human being and other body parts.
The boxes were loaded but Spencer did not want to board the car.He said to his boss,he prefered to run after the car.
All the way from East London to Golder's Green he was shouting to every constable he saw.
"Please,stop and search the car".
Finally there were two constables who believed him and stoped the car and asked Mr.Businessman what were in the boxes.
When they opened them they found the remains of an young woman.
Regrettably this is still NOT a PROVE that M.Richman killed her.
Then according the Rules of Evidence ,the Police could catch someone carrying a corpse...this does not mean he killed it.
They had to prove that this was the corpse of HARRIET and also have sufficient forensic evidence that her naster killed her,put her body remains into cloride and
burried her under the floor of the warehouse,which he was renting.
Searching the warehouse they found her cloths,which he wore before she died.
Still not sufficient evidence as the defense solicitor said,she might have commited a suicide.
"Dear colleque"..said the Prosecutor...
"Do you sugest that young Harriet shoot herself with a revolver in the BACK of her head;cut herself in pieces;jumped into a wooden boxes;dugg herself a grave under the floor of the defendant's warehouse and SHUT the cover of the boxes behind herself!"
This argument was sufficient for the Jury to sentence Mr.Business man for murder on his mistress.
This case I read it in a book,named"THE ART OF CROSSEXAMINATION".
it is an authentic case,happened in England at the end of 19 century.
it is calle:"The sillent evidence.
Res Ispa Loquitor,
Leicester is a good night out! I bet the McCanns are looking forward to returning there. Plus, you can't beat Red Leicester cheese. English cheese in general is ace! I bet they've missed all that!
I hope this tragedy can be resolved one way or another! Poor little Maddy! What state of mind are her siblings in, one has to wonder? My eyes well for them and for the McCanns' pain (even though they were so utterly negligent).
They ought to go for counselling when they return to Leicestershire. The emotional trauma must be taking its grim toll on them!
Sir Nutmeg Professor O'Chav
"habeas corpus is not required to have a charge of murder or a pronouncement of murder in certain cases."
Habeas corpus has nothing whatever to do with pressing any charge. Habeas corpus is a legal action for getting an accused out of jail prior to trial.
As I told Eurotourist, best leave this sort of work to the progfessionals.