Free Essays on High

I could tell she knew- By the way she looked at me, Peered at me, tugging at something Only I was supposed to know- How dare her- I turn in circles trying to make sense Of things- But I’m angry cause she saw me and She wasn’t supposed to know- But it was my fault- It was my fault because I pranced All out there knowing she could’ve Seen but not caring, being too high Too out of control to care- And then, after that- Trying to take back those moments- Trying to rearrange and wondering why- It’ s not fair but that’s the way it is- ‘cause even as a I think it- even as I write it- I’ll still feel- Still feel angry- Hating that she knows, Hating that she sees me- Still feel hate- Hating myself, Hating this world, You in my fucking face- Hating god and church and All the fucking hypocrites, Hating the devil†¦my uncle†¦ Every man in this world- Hating the school system and My teachers and every fucking Peer- Hating acting†¦waking up and being Forced into caring- Hating me hating the world hating me Hating the world Hating Hating feeling this way Just hating. And then†¦ After all that, We still wonder why-... Free Essays on High Free Essays on High I could tell she knew- By the way she looked at me, Peered at me, tugging at something Only I was supposed to know- How dare her- I turn in circles trying to make sense Of things- But I’m angry cause she saw me and She wasn’t supposed to know- But it was my fault- It was my fault because I pranced All out there knowing she could’ve Seen but not caring, being too high Too out of control to care- And then, after that- Trying to take back those moments- Trying to rearrange and wondering why- It’ s not fair but that’s the way it is- ‘cause even as a I think it- even as I write it- I’ll still feel- Still feel angry- Hating that she knows, Hating that she sees me- Still feel hate- Hating myself, Hating this world, You in my fucking face- Hating god and church and All the fucking hypocrites, Hating the devil†¦my uncle†¦ Every man in this world- Hating the school system and My teachers and every fucking Peer- Hating acting†¦waking up and being Forced into caring- Hating me hating the world hating me Hating the world Hating Hating feeling this way Just hating. And then†¦ After all that, We still wonder why-...

WRITE PAPERS FOR MONEY

WRITE PAPERS FOR MONEY Its no secret that writing is a passion that you have not noticed before. Writing for money is an exciting opportunity to unite your job and your hobby. How do you start writing for money today? Well there are a number of different opportunities like article writing, short story writing, copywriting, web-site content writing, essay writing, etc. Start with a company you would like to work with and apply for the job by sending your complete resume and a sample of your perfect writing. If you remember that you have written good papers back at your college or university, then you should try to write papers for money. You never know what outcome there can be.   Another characteristic about yourself that you should develop is the confidence in what you write about. Self-frustration and getting lost is not going to get you anywhere. You have to stay confident of what you write about. If you find yourself not having enough knowledge or experience, read more materials about the topic and get prepared. Nobody was born with the developed and skillful writing. All major authors trained themselves as they were constantly writing something. Another important thing is to stay focused meaning do not pay too much attention to bad reviews. Yes it is important to benefit from your down-falls, yet it is more important to stay focused and continue what you are doing right now. Keep on writing!

The Sexualization of Disney Charaters Research Paper

The Sexualization of Disney Charaters - Research Paper Example The problem, is that Disney has began marketing itself as a brand that reaches out and entertains family members of all ages. The company also uses unrealistic depictions of the physical image of their princess characters in the sense that rather than having a little girl playing a role, the character is always a young woman whose figure and actions depicts that of an unrealistic fashion model rather than that of a real world child dealing with image issues. In other words, Disney sexualizes their characters to the point that instead of inspiring little girls to love themselves, they instead learn to self-loathe because they do not meet the standards set by the Disney characters that they admire the most. They do not learn to love themselves as they are because the Disney characters are not depicted in a realistic manner. The problem with this situation is that Disney princess characters carry a tremendous amount of influence over the minds of little girls. Peggy Orenstein explains that: â€Å"The company’s wares reflect the changing taste of their demographic and it’s the change that’s disturbing. â€Å"Think of their memory as a blank slate that is ready to be written upon. Little girls know nothing about demographics, what is right or wrong, or even how a girl should perceive herself. That is something that is influenced by the mass media marketing that is controlled by Disney. That writing becomes the impression by which the child leads her life afterwards. In the case, Disney, through its artists rendering influences the little girl into believing what they want her to believe in order to move their products and sell their movie tickets and videos. Previous Disney incarnations of their princesses were mostly passive females who looked to men in order to be saved. However, D isney decided to go a different route in an effort to keep up with the feminist cause. Hence the empowered and sexually charged portrayal of their current crop of princesses (Greenfield, Beth â€Å"Disney Princess Makeover Sparks Outrage: Merida Petition Goes Viral†). Let us remember that starting with Ariel, the little mermaid, Disney began serving up young women who are basically self-centered and with a knack for getting themselves into trouble. Ariel as a princess of the sea thought only of herself and her dreams and her ambitions. When she came across her prince charming, she then set her sights on snagging him to the extent of endangering herself in the process.

Leadership Argument Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Leadership Argument - Essay Example There have been various types of leadership whose distinction is based on the resultant effects. While the major effects are those affecting the business and the affairs of the state, the overall impacts to the people makes the study of leadership imperative. Leadership has been described as a way through which things are done. However, a particular type of leadership can result into benefits to people or sometimes disadvantage them. In this case, people normally depend on the decisions made by the society and the other ruling authorities, such as governments. Some others like Tracy (2014) believes that leadership is more necessary and critical than before. The leadership that benefits the people must be under people who are visionary and courageous. Such leaders can chart new seas as well as break new grounds (Arvey, Rotundo, & Johnson, 2006). An effective leadership will definitely make the difference even in ordinary situations and in little things. This encompasses simple things like helping people work excellently and nicely. Normally, effective leadership is independent of the setting. Delivery will be based on the passion of the leader and the desire to impact the people around positively, irrespective of the level of dependency of the subordinates. Taking the example of a school setting, a good leader will instill the value to both the students and the teachers. Basically, leadership is not about being the boss but is about making positive impacts on the lives of others. It is, therefore, imperative that effective leadership characterize all aspects of the lives of people, both at individual and society levels. There are various aspects that make goods leadership (Bonnici, 2011). Leadership depends on the type and personality of the leader. While it is true that leaders are not born but made, it is also true that leadership a group does not depend fully on the influence of degree of power of the leader. First of all,

Shooting an Elephant Essay Example for Free

Shooting an Elephant Essay George Orwells essay â€Å"Shooting an Elephant† was a first-person narration by an Indian Imperial Police officer. Set in British colony of Burma during the early 20th century, the officer was seen as white foreign repressive authority figure. His relationship with Burmese natives was poor. The officer sympathized with the feelings of the Burmese, but still resented them. The story revolved around an elephant that killed a Burmese man and the officer’s moral dilemma about having to shoot it. A large crowd gathered wanting the beast dead, while the officer deliberated the elephant’s fate. The officer shot several times wounding the elephant. Unable to watch the elephant suffer the officer left, while the crowd stayed to watch it died slowly in agony. The officer questioned whether the right decision was made. Orwell effectively used rhetorical strategies to argue the shooting by implementing response to opposing views, assumptions, and emotional appeals. Orwell responded to opposing views by claiming the shooting was legitimate and fulfilled the wishes of the natives. Orwell argued, â€Å"legally I had done the right thing, for a mad elephant has to be killed, like a mad dog, if its owners fails to control it† as a justification for the shooting. (383) The narrator was trying to vindicate the killing of the elephant through law. He acknowledged that the shooting had divided opinions among Europeans (Orwell 383). The elder people felt he was right while the younger Europeans thought it was wrong to kill the animal just because it had a slayed native (Orwell 383). The death of the native gave the officer a defense for the shooting. The narrator explained that the shooting was a necessity; his own life was in danger if he did not pull the trigger because of the size of the crowd that wanted the beast dead (Orwell 382). Orwell wrote, â€Å"it put me legally in the right and it gave me sufficient pretext for shooting the elephant† (383). Orwell assumptions start at the beginning of the essay when the Burmese hassle the narrator. The author claimed he was hated by many of the Burmese (Orwell 378). Orwell summarized the natives despised him because he was an officer of the Imperial police; â€Å"As an officer I was an obvious target and was baited whenever it was safe to do so† (378). The narrator was appalled at the treatment of the Burmese by the British, yet beholden to do his job. Orwell contended that imperialism was wrong (378). When it was time to shoot the elephant, the officer was in a difficult situation. He had the authority, the means, and the skill, but he did not have the will. He did not want to shoot the elephant (Orwell 380). The author compared the elephant to a piece of machinery; the officer realized the importance of the elephant to the owner and the financial cost (Orwell 380). Assumptions were made about animal significance and worth. He believed as the Burmese did about the Empire. The assumptions facilitated Orwell realization that he would have to shoot the elephant (381). Orwell’s use of emotional appeal was strongly evident in this essay. Orwell showed with convincing imagery the narrator’s shame of the British Empire (379). Orwell appeal was reinforced by an unbearable sense of remorse (379). The officer was overwhelmed by massive burden and pressure over having to decide on whether or not to shoot the elephant. The writer said, â€Å"The people expected it of me and I got to do it; I could feel their two thousand wills pressing me forward† (Orwell 381). Several times the officer repeated his feelings about not wanting to shoot the elephant (Orwell 380-381). The officer expressed the pressure he was under by the native to shoot the elephant (Orwell 381). Orwell wanted the readers to understand his position about the shooting by writing the essay. The officer had the ultimate authority amongst the crowd to shoot the elephant however; the crowd’s large numbers essentially ordered and forced him into compliance. One cannot forget about a man’s pride being blemished, especially in the early twentieth century. Orwell wrote, â€Å"my whole life, every white man’s life in the East, was one long struggle not to be laughed at† (381). The emotional appeal Orwell makes is strong through the entire essay. The argument that Orwell made about having to shoot an elephant was strong. He responded to opposing views and the reasons why the elephant had to be put down. Orwell was legally justified but also provided sufficient evidence for self-perseveration. There were two thousand natives wanting the execution to happen. Orwell used assumptions to enhance the mood and perception the Burmese people had of him and of the British Empire. The author acknowledged that his assumptions of the Empire were the same. Orwell used the emotional appeals throughout the entire essay. The author cited reasons for having to shoot the elephant; he denied his inner voice and did the opposite. Clearly, Orwell argument for having to shoot the elephant was proven through use of the rhetorical strategies.

The Psychology of Human Rights Violators and Courageous Resistors Essay

The Psychology of Human Rights Violators and Courageous Resistors Using a vocabulary based on the work of social psychologist Ervin Staub, it is clear that many researchers have found elements of the human psyche and the human experience that contribute both to acts of courageous resistance in the face of horrific human rights abuses as well as contributing to the perpetration of the acts themselves. Certain categories emerge while assessing the actions of an individual in either of these circumstances: environmental or circumstantial pressure and support; concept of self in relation to others, and specific learning experiences that coalesce into paradigms from which actions are taken. In his analysis of human rights violations, Staub discusses â€Å"difficult life conditions,† â€Å"in-group/ out-group† distinctions, and â€Å"learning by doing.† Various other scholars of human rights have a vocabulary that will enhance the meaning of this terminology in the context of both human rights violators, and courageous resistors of t hat violence. Staub's assessment of â€Å"difficult life conditions† and how people behave under threat to safety and security is supported and expanded upon by Kristen Renwick Monroe, who posits that, though ethnic difference and tensions are not a sufficient to explain human rights abuses, they will be magnified by economic struggle or other stresses, and can explode into acts of extreme violence. She draws in the concept of dehumanization, addressed by Staub and many others, positing that the cognitive perceptions of a people under strain can be manipulated to scapegoat a group of people in an attempt to release the frustration of powerlessness in hard times. The idea that one can distance oneself from one's victi... ...ing the path of â€Å"learning by doing† towards courageous resistance. Those raised in authoritarian cultures according to various theorists, including Staub, often don't have the internal locus of control that allows them to make the connection between seeing oppression and choosing not to participate in it. So, this is another place where theories of pro-social actions and human rights violation are converse to one another. A synthesis of all of these theories leads me to believe the following: if one can use the similar pathways of â€Å"learning by doing† and â€Å"authorization† within a pro-social, inclusive world view and create a society where authoritative child rearing need not become authoritarian child rearing, it is possible to say that there may one day be a world where there will be no violations of human rights that will require others to courageously resist.

Reality of Business and HR Strategy Essay

â€Å"Strategic HRM is an approach that defines how the organisation’s goals will be achieved through people by means of HR strategies and integrated HR policies and practices† (Armstrong, 2009). The overall aim of strategic HRM is to maximise the firms’ performance by making sure all employees are of high calibre and committed to achieving the organisations competitive advantage. Within HRM it is not clear how to best link strategic HRM to the organisations strategy. The main argument involves two different approaches; best fit and best practice. The best fit strategy involves organisations tailoring their HR strategies around the organisations strategies and needs. Whereas the latter suggests that organisations will be more successful if they adopt best practices within the work place (Boxall and Purcell, 2008). ‘Best practice’, a form of universalism, is based around the theory that high commitment will reflect the organisations high performance l evel regardless of the firm’s competitive strategy (Torrington et al, 2011). This is demonstrated in Guest’s model (1989) Theory of HRM. The model is built around four main HR goals; commitment, flexibility, quality and strategic integration, the theory being if all goals are achieved then the organisation’s performance will be enhanced. Pfeffer (1998), also a supporter, progresses the said theory by claiming policies such as; high spending on training, high wages directly linked to performance will determine a high level of commitment and performance. Another criticism of best practice theory is that it is difficult to accept that there is an overall best practice for every organisation . One practice may have been successful and effective for an organisation does not mean that it will work for every organisation (Armstrong, 2006). This factor helps show that when analysing business and hr within all organisations best practice is impossible to achieve as every organisations situations are different. Torrington et al (2011), dispute the validity of the theory by arguing that a simple model cannot realistically meet the complexity that comes with managing staff. As well as universalist the approach is also unitarist, as it presumes that all management have to do is follow a set of policies and it will automatically a chieve high performance, and that workers will obey  this without question. In reality this is a lot more complicated to re-enact. Hofstede (1980), as cited by Boxall and Purcell, also argues that it would be extremely difficult to design a set of practices due to extreme differences between countries and cultures. Furthermore, best practice may benefit executives but on shareholders and waged employee’s expense. An example being, it may put in place a generous redundancy package for executives and typically employees lose out. It can be argued that the most sustainable HRM practices are those which benefit the organisation as a whole such as best fit (Boxall and Purcell, 2008). In a addition to these arguments, Boxall and Purcell (2011) cite studies by MacDuffie (1995) and Ichniowski and Snow (1999) which suggest that best practice is impossible to achieve when comparing two industrial firms. Although many theorists would argue that best fit is the most applicable for most organisations, best practice should not be completely overlooked as Becker and Gerhart (1996) state that it may be more †appropriate for identifying the principles underlying the choice of practices, as opposed to the practices themselves† References Armstrong (2009) Armstrong’s Handook of Human Resource Management Practice London: Koogan Boxall, P & Purcell, J (2011) Strategy and Human Resource Management 3rd Edition Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan Becker, B E and Gerhart, S (1996) The Impact of Human Resource Management on Organisational Performance: Progress and Prospects Academy of Management Journal 39 (4), Page 779-801 Hall, L, Taylor L. & Torrington, D. (2008) Human Resource Management 7th Edition London: Prentice Hall

Free trade is a global public good

In acquiring a greater understanding of the aforementioned terms, one would proceed to outline the cost and benefits of free trade and any barriers that are associated with trade which can prohibit the process of free trade. Once all the above information has been given, one can then analyze the information and make an inform decision on if free trade is a global public good. In defining trade, O'Brien and Williams stated that trade refers to the exchange of one commodity for another.They further noted that whenever two or more individual's exchanges goods and services they are engaging in the process of trade, which has been in existence since the beginning of time – through the barter system. It is important to note that trade is an essential social activity that satisfies humans' wants, needs and desire; in other words, due to the existence of trade persons has improve their standard of living incredibly (O'Brien and Williams, 2010).It should be noted that there are three d ifferent forms of trade namely domestic, intra-regional and international trade. Domestic trade is also refers as internal trade which looks at the archiving and selling of local goods within the national boundaries of a specific country. It is believe that domestic trade functions as a link between producers and consumers; and it is sub-divided into two categories of wholesale and retail, through the exchange of goods and services.Trade is also done at the intra-regional level among members states of a regional bloc such as CAROM; this is mainly done to enhance regional cooperation through regional institution while primarily focusing on the economic exchange of goods and services. However, international trade is done on a such wider whereas the focus is on the exchange of goods, capital and services conducted across international borders.Due to globalization, industrialization and trade liberalizing, countries are allowed to engage in trade at all level rather to satisfy person wa nts and needs for domestic, intra- regional and international goods and services. It is important to note the principle of trade remains the same at all level and the only difference in the above three forms of trade is the cost and this is due to high level of taxes and trade barriers (Donkey, 2004). Some scholars argue for the movement of ere trade since it would remove all forms of trade barriers it would allow the world to trade freely with each other without any restriction.On the other hand, critics of free trade argue that free trade enhance exploitative condition where some nation has an unfair advantage over other due to their wealth and manufacturing capabilities. This is why it is argues that in theory, the concept of free trade is an excellent idea but in practice it is a human devastation on small island states and developing nations, as these countries lack the economies of scale that develop nations would have due to their size ND economic power (Donkey, 2004).Free tr ade can be defined as the absence of government restrictions upon goods, capital, and the flow of labor between nations, which could possibly hinder the process of trade. It is believe that an advantage of engaging in free trade is that it allows for nations to concentrate their effort on manufacturing specific product or service, where that nation can possibly have a distinct comparative advantage (Irwin, 2009). It is expected that under a free trade agreement a number of barriers to trade would be removed such as taxes, tariffs, import quotas and subsidies etc.If such is done, the implementation of a free trade agreement would allow foreign companies to trade their goods and service just as easy as a domestic company since they would be no restriction on trade. Additionally, it is believe that free trade will lower the prices of goods and set-vices being offer by promoting competition, innovation and specialization of products and services within a specific region (Irwin 2009).How ever as noted earlier, theoretically speaking free trade sounds like a perfect model but practically speaking it is not as easy a model to replicate and this is due to the fact that ere trade has numerous disadvantages to some states that would be involve in the process of free trade. Therefore, to leaves one to question if free trade can be considered as a Global Public Good (JPG) but before one can answer the above mentioned question, it is crucial to find out what is a global public good.According to the International Task Force on Global Public Goods; any goods or services that are essential for survival is a global public good and it should be made available for all without any charges (www. Nautilus. Org). Given the aforementioned definition, it Can be argued that the only global public good that is available in this world is â€Å"air', since all other things in the world has a cost attach to it. However, it should be noted that global public goods is a new concept which is still in the developmental stages by academics, researchers and policy analysts.Typically speaking, a global public good is considered a global good when it has universal benefits, covering multiple groups of society and by extension the entire population. The World Bank defines global public goods as commodities, resources, services and systems of rules or policy regimes with substantial cross-border externalities hat are important for development and poverty-reduction, and that can be produced in sufficient supply only through cooperation and collective action by developed and developing countries (www. Rollback. Org). In practical terms, the determination that the development community should work cooperatively to produce a desired quality and quantity of global public goods that involves consideration of how such action should be implemented and how collective financing can be employed to ensure that the respective public good is not underselling.However, the united Nations (UN) declare that Gaps should meet two requirements, they must be â€Å"non- vial† (where both you and I can consume the good without affecting the utility either of us derive from its consumption) and they must be â€Å"non- clubbable† (whereas no one can be prevented from enjoying it the good, once it has been produced) (Gaul, et al. 2003). The provision of public goods is a key element of the quality of life and environmental sustainability. The underplays Of global goods may affect prospects for economic development and threaten global economic stability, peace and prosperity.There are a number of mechanisms that are needed for the effective delivery of public odds and services in some developing countries that are central to poverty eradication strategy. However, the role of public goods in economic development has been neglected in the mainstream literature and the current views of economic development need to be enriched and complemented by considerations of global public goods to achieve sustained high-quality economic growth, and to ensure that growth translates into effective poverty eradication strategies.This is essential to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (United Nations Industrial Development Organization, 2008). Although the Millennium Development goals are not secretaries consider as public goods by nature, attaining them requires investments in international public goods. For instance finding a new vaccine against malaria or developing an accessible treatment for AIDS, preserving the peace or creating easier access to knowledge, promoting financial stability or establishing a more open and fair trading system could have a greater impact on poverty reduction that could aid in the international arena (Entailer and Trifler, 2002).There are several categories of public goods that are identified in numerous literatures which are all closely related to five f the Millennium Development Goals: the environment, health, security, kno wledge and governance. While it is believe that the environment, health and security are largely associated with benefits derived from reducing risk. Both knowledge and governance are primarily associated with enhancing capacity building.It is important to note that providing international public goods takes more than financial resources but rather it take takes the proper regulatory framework and institutional responses to ensure their supply. And that is where the greatest shortcomings remain. The world has made enormous strides in communications and interdependence between countries, but we have not developed the policies or institutions needed to manage these processes (Et Veldt, Hewitt and Morrissey, 2006).Free trade is regarded as a public good within the international political economy but the international community has a common interest in realizing the benefits of trade and the free movement of goods and services, which in turn requires co-operation. Due to the lack of coo peration among sovereign rational actors in an anarchical international society, the status of free trade as a public good appear somewhat difficult and even unlikely at times.It is assume that this occur due to the absence of central authorities within the international arena (Jones, 2002). In an international political system of individually rational actors (states) and no central authority capable of enforcing cooperation or providing public goods unilaterally, international agreements and organizations such as the General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GAIT) and the World Trade Organization (WTFO), are believed to be important and can be considered as an alternative mechanism to cooperation.The point is hat there is a need for an international regime which cooperates to achieve global public goods. One can argue that the benefits of free trade have differed on several accounts from traditional public goods and even if one tries to modify free trade to that of the classic trade theory it becomes even more problematic. Therefore, this leaves one with the question of if free trade is a public good and if so how can it be modify in such a way whereas everyone can eventually benefit from its existence (Hickman and Kookiest, 1997).The status of free trade as a public good serves as a point of departure specially for neo-liberal as it relates to regime theory on international cooperation concerning trade liberalizing. It can be argued that the existence of dilemmas of collective action leads to the retardation of the provision of public goods whereas international agreements and organization had failed to establish cooperation.The reason why the provision of public goods is so problematic is that it entails certain dilemmas of collective action, such as the prisoner's dilemma (base on mistrust and manipulation to receive a specific benefit over others rather than cooperating) and the free rider lemma (enjoying the good without contributing to the provision of i t) which are central in preventing rational actors from cooperating in the pursuit of global public goods.It is therefore, evident that international trade requires states to cooperate in order to dismantle the barriers of trade (Et Veldt, Hewitt and Morrissey, 2006). While some scholars would try effortlessly to make the argument that free trade is a global public good, one should note that there are a number of different barriers to trade, (politically, socially, environmentally, economically, and technologically among other). With all hose barriers against trade this leads one to ask a number of questions such as: Is trade is beneficial or harmful?Should traders be free to move goods and services across national frontiers? And if trade is to be subject to all these restrictions, what kinds of barriers should be imposed and what are the given reasons for such barriers? It is therefore important to know that within the global contemporary economy, international trade touches many s ocieties and communities through direct and indirect effects. It reaches into our homes, places of work and our recreational venues, depending on one's living arrangement and how deeply integrated one's society is within the global political economy.This is why trade is of such importance to all because it impacts us all through the simple consumption of our food to the very clothes we wear on a daily basis; these are all evidence of the tremendous importance of trade across national frontiers (Jones, 2002). For one to further understand if global trade can be seen as a public good, one would need to analyze the cost and benefits to free trade in an international arena. The benefits of free trade have been espouse by the liberals, who believe that free read benefits everyone whereas it increases efficiency and raises the level of productivity.However in sharp contrast, radical and nationalist critics have argued that free trade undermine national economies, create uneven development and damages the environment. It can be argued that the liberals trade theory appears to have created a high level of skepticism in the minds of persons, whereas the liberals are proposing that both sides to a transaction can make a profit. Now in the minds of the average persons this appears as absurd, especially since the common view of transactions see one did gaining while the other side makes a lost.Contrary to popular believe, the liberals has made a case for free trade in which all persons involve can gain, based on the theory of comparative advantage. According to this theory, countries should specialize and produce goods and services for which they possess a comparative advantage (O'Brien and Williams, 2010: 150). The move toward freer international trade has its roots in David Orchard's classical theory of comparative advantage, which is driven by inherent differences in a countries' capacity – and hence the cost – to produce different products and arrives.Ri chard definition of comparative advantage includes specialization of a product, returns of scale, product differentiation and technological differences. He believes comparative advantages in returnable industries are those with high startup costs, making small-scale entry difficult which can lead to more gains from trade and robust economic development (United Nations Industrial Development Organization, 2008). However, mercantilism's theories argued that the aim of a country was to increase its trade relative to that of its rivals hence increasing its wealth.For mercantilism, trade was a ere-?sum game with one country's gain equivalent to another country loss. Contrary to other contending views, Adam Smith argument of absolute advantage was the first to counter the protectionist philosophy of the mercantilism who regarded a positive balance of trade and accumulation of capital as the main goal of any trade policy. Smith pointed out the benefits of international trade and the divisi on of labor in his major work ‘The Wealth of Nations†.Smith notes that by specializing in producing what you do best and importing other goods from trading partners, one would gain both individually and collectively. It should be noted that Orchard's singular achievement was to demonstrate that trade was a positive-sum game in which all parties would have benefited, even if one party had an absolute advantage in the production of all goods and services (Hickman and Kookiest, 1997). Under a liberal trading order, trade would be undertaken by countries according to their comparative advantage.Due to this, countries would improve their economic growth, become more stable, powerful and efficient since they would be specializing in the production of foods and services in they were the most efficient producers and enabling their nonusers to buy foreign goods at the lowest prices. Based on the rules of comparative advantage, specialization would promote efficiency and increase growth, as seen in the underlying principles of the modern trade theory.However, Orchard's assumption that differences in labor productivity were the sole determinants Of comparative advantage is too limiting since it focuses too much on capital, labor and land. One can also note that the theory or comparative advantage appears to be very prescriptive since it suggests that the welfare of an individual country and by extension the world ill be improved base on countries specializing according to their comparative advantage (O'Brien and Williams 2010).From a liberal perspective, protectionism is inefficient since it reduces competition, and increases the monopoly power and thus the profits of the industries which benefit from protection. On the other hand, free trade increases the degree of products available to consumers, although ultimately it will reduce the degree of product differentiation in each country. The gains from trade come parlay from the greater degree of product varie ty and partly from the lower rice per product.The theory of free trade has emphasizes the gains or benefits from trade from a nation. There are two main aspects to be gain from the engaging in trade which are specialization which leads to increase productivity and economic growth; and diffusion of knowledge, innovation and production techniques which is closely linked to international trade. Trade is seen as an engine of growth as it advances the technological progress of society making production more efficient, effective and affordable within the 21 SST century (O'Brien and Williams, 2010).Despite the theoretical elegance, the theory of free trade is constantly being attacked by numerous critics. It can also be argued that free trade is meant to help eliminate unfair trade barriers to goods and services as well as raise the economy in developed and developing nations. There is a popular believe that free trade will create an unfair advantage to domestic supplier and it would reduc e the number of jobs created in a mercantilism society.For instance, persons within agricultural base countries have argued that industrialization has hinder their attempts to industrialized since comparative advantage dictates that they antique to import industrial products whereas they might have a future comparative advantage in the production of a specific industrial product. In such a case, one can argue that it is necessary to implement the necessary protections for local industries, until they become competitive and can reap the benefits of comparative advantage (Lamer 1994). Another argument against free trade is that it places the precedence of national security over trade.In other words, it is argued that countries need to seek alternative methods of acquiring certain food apart from via trade in times of war and conflict. Simply put, it means that countries need to be self-sufficient in the production of certain strategic industries. It is also a widely accepted view that if free trade threatens the national security of a state, that it would be necessary for the government of the state to impose certain tariff and taxes on trade and even impose any necessary restriction if needed in order to protect the society (Entailer and Trifler, 2002).The third argument against free trade is that it is harmful for the environment, whereas the increase in farming, pesticide, emissions Of greenhouse gases and high energy usage as created a harmful impact towards the environment. The Global Development and Environmental Institute (EDGE), find the environmental impact as mixed whereas some countries have a higher level of environmental hazards than others.Therefore, the EDGE suggested that the WTFO imposes certain barriers and restriction on those countries which has a higher level of environmental pollutants in comparison to the countries which has fewer pollutants since free trade is contributing to the degradation of the environment (O'Brien and Williams, 2010) . In conclusion it can be argued that ere trade is not a public good as it creates a number of disadvantages for some nations especially the developing countries. Such disadvantages include the loss of jobs, environmental hazards; inequalities in food securities and retardation in the development of industrialized products.Given the rules of the UN in regards to global public goods, in order for something to be considered as a public good it has to be able to benefit all persons and any usage of the item of product should not affect anyone. Therefore one can argue that free trade is not a global public good as it do not benefit all takeovers and in order for free trade to benefit all there need to be some trade barriers implemented on some nations and that in itself is against the rule Of a global public good.

The Crimes of Florida Death Row Inmate Tiffany Cole

The Crimes of Florida Death Row Inmate Tiffany Cole Tiffany Cole, along with three co-defendants, was convicted of the kidnapping and first-degree murder of a Florida couple, Carol and Reggie Sumner.   A Trusted Friend Tiffany Cole knew the Summers. They were a frail couple that had been her neighbors in South Carolina. She had also bought a car from them and had visited them in their home in Florida. It was during one of those visits that she learned that they had sold their South Carolina home and made a $99,000 profit. From that point on, Cole, Michael Jackson, Bruce Nixon, Jr., and Alan Wade  began plotting a way to rob the couple. They knew that gaining access to their home would be easy since the Summers knew and trusted Cole. The Robbery On July 8, 2005, Cole, Jackson, Nixon, Jr., and Alan Wade went to the Summers home with the intention of robbing and killing the couple. Once inside the home, the Summers were bound with duct tape while Nixon, Wade, and Jackson searched the home for valuables. They then forced the couple to their garage and into the trunk of their Lincoln Town Car Buried Alive Nixon and Wade drove the Lincoln Town Car, followed by Cole and Jackson who were in a Mazda that Cole had rented for the trip. They were headed to a spot located right across the Florida line in Georgia. They had already picked out the spot and prepared it by digging a large hole two days earlier.   When they arrived Jackson and Wade led the couple into the hole and buried them alive. At some point, Jackson had forced the couple to tell him their personal identification number for their ATM card. The group then abandoned the Lincoln and found a hotel room to stay in for the night. The next day they returned to the Summers home, wiped it down with Clorox, stole jewelry and a computer which Cole later pawned. Over the next few days, the group celebrated their crime by spending several thousand dollars that they got from the Summers ATM account. The Investigation On July 10, 2005, Mrs. Summers daughter, Rhonda Alford, called authorities and reported that her parents were missing.   Investigators went to the Summers home and discovered a bank statement which showed a large sum of money in it. The bank was contacted and it was learned that an excessive amount of money had been withdrawn from the account over the past few days. On July 12, Jackson and Cole, posing as the Summers, made a call to the Jacksonville Sheriffs Office. They told the detective that responded to the call that they had left town quickly due to a family emergency and they were having problems accessing their account. They were hoping that he could help. Suspecting that they were not really the Summers, the detective contacted the bank and asked them not to block any withdraws from the account so that he could continue his investigation. He was then able to track the cellular telephone that the callers used. It belonged to Michael Jackson and records showed the phone had been used near the Summers home at the time that they disappeared. There were also several calls made to a car rental company who was able to provide the detective with a description of the Mazda that Cole had rented and which was now overdue. By using the global tracking system in the car, it was determined that the Mazda had been within blocks of the Summers home on the night that they went missing. Busted On July 14, the entire group, with the exception of Cole, was caught at a Best Western Hotel in Charlestown, South Carolina. Police searched the two hotel rooms that were rented under Coles name and found personal property belonging to the Summers. They also found the Summers ATM card in Jacksons back pocket. Cole was caught at her home near Charlestown after police got here address through the car rental agency where she rented the Mazda. Confession Bruce Nixon was the first co-defendant that confessed to murdering the Summers. He provided the police with the details of the crimes that were committed, how the robbery and abduction were planned and the location of where the couple was buried. Dr. Anthony J. Clark, Medical Examiner for the Georgia Bureau of Investigation performed autopsies on the Summers and testified that they both died after being buried alive and their airways passages became blocked with dirt.   Cole Pleads Her Case Cole took the stand during her trial. She testified that she thought that the crime would be a simple theft and that she did not knowingly participate in the robberies, kidnappings, or murders. She also said that she was at first unaware that the Summers were in the trunk of their Lincoln and that they were being taken to the pre-dug gravesite. She then said the holes were dug in order to scare the Summers into giving up their ATM PIN numbers. Conviction and Sentencing On October 19, 2007, the jury deliberated for 90 minutes before finding Cole guilty of two counts of first-degree murder, on both premeditation and felony-murder theories, two counts of kidnapping, and two counts of robbery.Cole was sentenced to death for each murder, life imprisonment for each kidnapping, and fifteen years for each robbery.  She is currently on death row at the  Lowell Correctional Institution Annex Co-Defendants Wade and Jackson were also convicted and sentenced to two death sentences.  Nixon pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and was sentenced to 45 years in prison.

Profile of Husband Killer Kelly Gissendaner

Profile of Husband Killer Kelly Gissendaner Kelly Gissendaner received the death penalty after being convicted of being the mastermind behind the murder of her husband, Doug Gissendaner. Prosecutors said Gissendaner  convinced her then-lover, Greg Owens, to commit the murder. Doug Gissendaner Doug Gissendaner was born in December 1966 at Crawford Long Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia. He was the oldest of three children and the only boy. His parents, Doug Sr. and Sue Gissendaner were devoted to their children and raised them to be respectful and responsible. The children grew up in a  happy,  close-knit family. However, unlike his siblings, Doug struggled in school, and it was discovered that he was dyslexic. When he finished high school in 1985, he had grown tired of constantly fighting to pass his grades and decided against his fathers wishes to go to college. Instead, he got a job working with his hands, which is where he always felt most comfortable. Greg Owen Greg Owen was born on March 17, 1971, in Clinton, Georgia. He was the second child of four born to parents Bruce and Myrtis Owen. Their third child, David, died from sudden infant death syndrome a few weeks after his birth in 1976. Greg grew up in a volatile  home filled with alcohol and violence. His parents were constantly moving from one town to another, putting the children in the position of always being newcomers. Friendless throughout much of their childhood, the Owen kids stuck closely together. Greg was a small child and easily intimidated. Belinda was a tough cookie that often stood up against those who  decided to bully  her younger and somewhat frail brother, including Bruce, their father, who violently lashed out at the children when he was drunk. For Greg, going to school was just another place to go to get picked on. He was a loner who struggled to keep his grades up. After managing to complete the eighth grade at age 14, he dropped out and went to work. Kelly Brookshire Kelly Brookshire was born in 1968 in rural Georgia. Her brother, Shane, was born a year later. Unlike the Gissendaners idyllic family, Kellys mother and father, Maxine and Larry Brookshire, liked to drink, do speed and fight. Their marriage ended after four years, partially due to Maxines infidelity. After the divorce, it took Maxine just eight days to marry her lover, Billy Wade. Maxines second marriage played out much the same as her first marriage. There was a lot of alcohol and a lot of fighting. Wade proved to be more  abusive  than Larry and would often lock the kids in their rooms while he beat on Maxine. He also released his ferocious temper onto the children. Throughout the years that Wade was around, he choked Kelly, and both he and Maxine would hit her with belts, flyswatters, their hand and whatever was within reach. But, for Kelly, it was the  mental abuse  that caused the deepest damage. Maxine was so busy dealing with her problems that she offered no support to Kelly when Wade constantly called her stupid and ugly and told her she was unwanted and unloved. As a result, Kelly had no self-esteem and often turned to the one place she could find pleasure; deep into her mind where fantasies of a better life gave her some joy. Abused children often find a feeling of safety at being at school, but for Kelly school was just another problem she could not solve. She was often tired and unable to concentrate and had a difficult time getting through grammar school. Unharmonious Reunion When Kelly was 10 she reunited with her birth father, Larry Brookshire, but the  reunion was a disappointment  to Kelly.  She hoped to establish a father-daughter relationship with Larry, but that did not happen. After his divorce to Maxine, he remarried and had a daughter. There was no attempt on his part to fit Kelly into his new world. New Kid on the Block At about the time that Kelly was entering high school, Maxine decided to divorce Wade and start fresh in a new town. She packed up the kids and moved to Winder, Georgia, a small town located 20 minutes from Athens and an hour from Atlanta. Being a new student in a small town where most of the children grew up knowing each other made it difficult for the six-foot tall Kelly to establish friendships. When other kids were cheering on their team at the high school football games, Kelly would be working the take-out window at the local McDonalds. Maxine had strict rules concerning Kellys social life. She was not allowed to bring friends home, especially boys, and she could not date. Tagged as a loner, Kellys  classmates had little to do with her  and often referred to her as trailer trash. Any friendships that did happen did not last long. That was until her senior year when she met Mitzi Smith. Seeing that Kelly appeared lonely, Mitzi reached out to her, and their friendship flourished. Pregnancy It was also during Kellys senior year that she became pregnant. She was able to hide it for several months, but into her sixth month, Mitzi along with the rest of the school could see that she was an expectant mother. She was subjected to more ridicule by her classmates, but Mitzi stood by her and helped her get through it. Throughout the  pregnancy, Kelly refused to give the name of the babys father. She told Mitzi it could have been either a student or another guy that she knew. Either way, she was not willing to tell the name. When Larry Brookshire found out about Kellys pregnancy he reconnected with her and the two decided that the child should have his last name. In June 1986, just two weeks after Kelly graduated  high school, her son Brandon Brookshire was born. Jeff Banks A few months after Brandon was born, Kelly began dating a boy she knew in high school, Jeff Banks. A few months later they were married. The marriage lasted just six months. It ended abruptly after Larry Brookshire went after Banks with a gun because he failed to pass Larry bread during a family dinner. Now a single mother, 19-year-old Kelly moved herself and her baby back into her mothers mobile home. For the next several  months, life for Kelly continued to be one dramatic episode after another. She was  arrested for shoplifting, physically abused by Larry, was unable to remain employed, and turned to alcohol as a way to  self-medicate. Doug and Kelly Doug Gissendaner and Kelly met in March 1989 through a mutual friend. Doug was instantly attracted to Kelly and the two began dating regularly. He also took an instant liking to Kellys son Brandon. That following September they married. Any reservations Dougs parents had about the marriage was quickly put to rest when they discovered that Kelly was four months pregnant on her wedding day. After the  wedding, Doug and Kelly both lost their jobs and moved in with Kellys mother. It was not long before the bickering and fighting that had plagued Kellys life started up again, only this time it included Doug. But his upbringing did not include knowing how to out scream another family member. He just tried hard not to engage. The Army Wanting a steady income and benefits for his expectant wife, Doug decided to enlist in the Army. There he made a lot of friends and was well respected by his superiors. Being in the Army also allowed Doug enough money to send to Kelly to cover the bills, but Kelly spent the money on other things. When Dougs parents found out that the couples car was about to be  repossessed, they bailed Kelly out and paid the car notes. In August 1990, a month after their first child, Kayla, was born, Doug was shipped to Wiesbaden, Germany and Kelly and the children followed him the following month. Trouble between the two began almost immediately. When Doug was away on Army assignments for days and weeks at a time, Kelly would throw parties, and it was rumored that she was seeing other men. After several confrontations,  Kelly and the children returned to Georgia. When Doug returned home permanently in October 1991, life with Kelly was miserable. A month later Kelly decided to it was her turn to join the Army and Doug decided the marriage was over. They immediately filed for a separation and were finally divorced in May 1993. Doug Sr. and Sue Gissendaner breathed a sigh of relief. Kelly was nothing but trouble. They were glad she was out of their sons life for good. Jonathan Dakota Brookshire (Cody) Kelly and the Army did not get along. She figured her only way out was to get pregnant. By September she got her wish and was back home living with her mother. In November she gave birth to a boy she named Jonathan Dakota but called Cody. The boys father was an Army friend who had cancer and died months before the child was born. Once home Kelly began her usual job hopping and dating multiple men. One job that she landed was at the International Readers League of Atlanta. Her boss was Belinda Owens, and soon the two began socializing together and eventually became best friends. Belinda invited Kelly to her home one weekend, and she introduced her to her brother Owen. There was an immediate attraction between Kelly and Owen, and they became inseparable. A Bad Match Belinda kept a sharp eye over her brother as his relationship with Kelly grew. Things seemed to be great between them at first, but before long Kelly began throwing tantrums and fighting with Greg when he did not do what she wanted. Ultimately Belinda decided that Kelly was not a good match for her brother. She particularly did not like how  she bossed him around. When all of their  fighting  led to a breakup, Belinda felt relief. December 1994 In December 1994, Doug and Kelly rekindled their relationship. They began attending church and working on their poor financial situation. Dougs parents were upset about the reunion and when Doug asked them for money to buy a house they refused. They had already spent thousands of dollars bailing him out of the financial disaster that Kelly had created when they were married. But their opinion failed to sway Doug, and in May 1995 the two were remarried. Doug had his family back together. But by September they were once again separated and Kelly was back seeing Greg Owen. One More Time Whether it was Dougs strong desire to have a  family or his deep love for Kelly, no one can say for sure, but by the beginning of 1996,  Kelly had convinced him  once again to get back together. Doug made a full commitment to the marriage, and to give Kelly the one thing she had always dreamed of having, he got a high-interest loan and bought a small three-bedroom ranch house on Meadow Trace Drive, in a subdivision in Auburn, Georgia. There he did what subdivisions Dads do- he worked on the house, did the yard work, and played with the kids. Kelly, however, filled her spare time focused on something that had nothing to do with her family or her husband. She was back in the arms of Greg Owen. February 8, 1997 Doug and Kelly Gissendaner had been in their new house for three months. On Friday, February 7, Kelly decided to take the children to her mothers house because she was going out for the night with friends from work. Doug spent the evening working on a car over at a friends house. At around 10 p.m. he decided to call it a night and headed home. Saturday he was going to be busy doing some work for the church, and he wanted a good nights sleep. After dinner and an hour spent at a dance club, Kelly told her three friends that she wanted to go home. She said she felt like something bad was going to happen and headed home around midnight. The following morning when Kelly awoke, Doug was not there. She made some calls, including one to his parents, but he was nowhere to be found. By  mid-morning, a missing persons  report  had been filed at the police station. Initial Investigation The initial investigation into Doug Gissendaners whereabouts began on the same day that he was reported as missing. A search group was sent out along the route that he was most likely to have traveled the previous night and statements were taken from family and friends. Kelly Owens was one of the first to talk with the investigators. During that  meeting, she described her marriage to Doug as problem free. But interviews with family members and friends told a different story and one  name, in particular, kept surfacing - Greg Owen. Odd Behavior By Sunday, Dougs car had been located abandoned on a dirt road in Gwinnett County. It had been partially burned from the inside out. On the same day that the burned-out car was found, friends and family gathered in support at Doug Sr. and Sue Gissendaners house. Kelly had also been  there but decided to take the children to the circus. Dougs parents found her behavior as odd for a wife whose husband had just gone missing. The news about the car was not good, but there was still hope that Doug would be found, possibly hurt, but  hopefully not dead. But as more days went by the optimism began to fade. Kelly did a few television interviews and then went back to work the following Tuesday, just four days into the search for her husband. Twelve Days Later It took 12 days to find Doug Gissendaner. His body was discovered a mile from where his car had been found. What looked like a pile of trash ended up to be Doug, dead, on his knees, bent at the waist with his head and shoulders leaning forward and his forehead lying in the dirt. Wild animals had already had an opportunity to  do their damage to his face which was unrecognizable. An  autopsy and dental records  were  necessary to confirm that it was indeed Doug Gissendaner. According to the autopsy, Doug was stabbed four times in the scalp,  neck, and shoulder. Murder Investigation Now with a  murder investigation  to conduct, the list of people to be interviewed grew considerably, with more names added to the list daily. In the meantime, Kelly Gissendaner asked to meet with investigators again to clarify some of what she said  in  her initial statement. She admitted that the marriage had been rocky and during one of their splits, she had been involved with Greg Owen. She said that Greg Owen had threatened to kill Doug when he learned that they were back together and working on their marriage. When asked if she was still in contact with Owen, she said only once in awhile because he called her repeatedly. But all of her candor did little to persuade investigators that she was not somehow  involved in her husbands murder. In the meantime, during Dougs funeral, Kelly showed more bizarre behavior when she had family and friends wait for her arrival for over an hour from the funeral home where the memorial was  given to the cemetery where Doug was to be buried. They found out later that she had stopped for a bite to eat and to do some shopping at the Cracker Barrel. The Alibi As for Greg Owen, he gave detectives a solid alibi. His roommate confirmed what Gret told them, that he had been home the entire night that Doug went missing and had been picked up by a friend at 9 a.m. the following morning for work. The roommate later recanted his story and said Greg had left the apartment the night of the murder and he did not see him again until 8 a.m. the following morning. This was exactly what the detectives needed to get Greg Owen back in for questioning. Greg Owen Cracks With Owens alibi now busted into pieces, he was brought back in for more questioning. Investigator Doug Davis conducted a second interview with Greg on February 24, 1997. Detectives already strongly suspected that Kelly had first-hand knowledge about her husbands murder. Phone records showed that she and Greg Owens talked to each other 47 times during the days before Doug was murdered and, unlike what Kelly had told detectives about Owen constantly calling her, Kelly had initiated the calls 18 times. At  first, Owen refused to answer any questions, but when a  plea deal  was brought to the table stating that he would get life with parole after 25 years, rather than a possible death sentence if he testified against Kelly Gissendaner, he quickly agreed and began confessing to murdering Doug. He told detectives that Kelly planned it all. First, she wanted to make sure that Doug bought the house and that they had moved into for a while before he was killed. She also wanted to secure an alibi on the night of the murder. When Owen asked her why not just divorce Doug, Kelly said he would never leave her alone. He went on to explain that on the night of the murder Kelly picked him up at his apartment, drove to her house, let him inside and provided a nightstick and a knife for Owen to use to attack Doug. She instructed him to make it look like a robbery, then left and went out with her friends while Owen waited in the house for Doug to come home. He said that Doug entered the house around 11 p.m. and Owen  held the knife to his neck, and then made him drive to Luke Edwards Road which is where Kelly told him to go. He then made Doug walk up an embankment and into the woods where he told him to get down on his knees. He struck him over the head with the nightstick and stabbed him, took his wedding ring and a watch, then left him to bleed to death. Next, he drove around in Dougs car until he received a page from Kelly with a code that would indicate that the murder had taken place. She then met Owen at Luke Edwards Road and wanted to see for herself that Doug was dead so she climbed the embankment and viewed his body. Then, with kerosene which Kelly provided, they burned Dougs car. Afterward, they made calls from phone booths at around the same time; then she dropped him off at his home. At that  point, they agreed that they should not be seen together for a while. Kelly Gissendaner Is Arrested Detectives wasted no time in arresting Kelly for the murder of her husband. They went to her home on February 25, well after  midnight made the arrest and then searched the house. This time Kelly had a  new story to tell  to the police. She admitted that she saw Greg Owen the night that Doug was murdered. She went and picked him up after he called her and asked her to meet him and he told her what he did to Doug, and then threatened to do the same to her and her children if she went to the police. The detectives and prosecutor did not believe her story. Kelly Gissendaner was charged with murder, felony murder and possession of a knife during the commission of a felony. She continued to insist that she was  innocent and even turned down a  plea bargain  similar to what Greg Owen received. The Trial With no women on Georgias death row, seeking a death sentence if Gissendaner was found guilty was a risk for prosecutors, but one they decided to take. Kellys trial began on November 2, 1998. She faced a sequestered jury made up of ten women and two men. Television cameras were allowed in the courtroom. She would also be facing Doug Gissendaners father who was permitted to be in the courtroom after he gave his testimony, along with two key witnesses whose testimonies could send her straight to death row. The Witnesses Greg Owens was the states number one witness. Most of his testimony matched his confession although there were some changes. One significant difference referenced the time that Kelly showed up at the murder scene. During court  testimony, he said she was there right as he murdered Doug. He also testified that instead of them  burning Dougs car  together, she tossed a soda bottle of kerosene out of the window and he retrieved and burned the car alone. Next was Laura McDuffie, an inmate that Kelly confided in and who she asked for help in finding a witness who would take the fall for $10,000 and say that she was with Owen, not Kelly, on the night of the murder. She provided McDuffie with a map of her house and a handwritten script of what the witness should say. An expert witness testified that the script was written by Gissendaner. Other witnesses for the prosecution testified about Kellys coldness upon hearing that Doug had been found murdered and about her affair with Greg Owen. One of her closest friends, Pam, testified that after Kelly was arrested, she called Pam and told her that she killed Doug. She called her again and said that Greg Owen forced her to do it by threatening to kill herself and her children. Closing Arguments The prosecutor, George Hutchinson, and Gissendaners defense lawyer, Edwin Wilson, presented strong  closing arguments. The Defense Wilsons argument was that the state had failed to prove Kellys guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. He referred to parts of Greg Owens testimony as unbelievable, pointing out that it did not seem possible that Doug Gissendaner would not fight Owen who was considerably smaller in height and weight. Doug had combat training and had served in a combat theater in Desert Storm. He was trained in escape and evasion, yet he followed Owens instructions to go out the door of his house, and not only get in the car but unlock the passengers side of the car so that Owen could get in. He also found it hard to believe that he would willingly drive to a deserted road, get out of the car and wait while Owen got out on his side, then come around to him, leading him up a hill, into the woods, without once trying to make a run for it or fight for his life. He also pointed out that Greg received a life sentence with the possibility of parole only if he agreed to testify against Gissendaner. He attempted to discredit the testimony of Laura McDuffie, describing her as a hardcore criminal that would do anything to scratch off some of her prison time. And as for Kellys friend, Pam, who testified that the day that Kelly was arrested that she called Pam and told her, I did it, he said she simply did not hear Kelly properly. The Prosecution During Hutchinsons closing argument, he  quickly  pointed out that no one can say what was going through Doug Gissendaner mind when he encountered Owen with a knife inside his home. But the point was that Doug was dead, regardless of the exact chain of events that led to it. As to the attempt to discredit Pams testimony, Hutchinson said Wilson was reinventing and mischaracterizing evidence. And about the credibility of Laura McDuffie, Hutchinson pointed out that what she testified about did not really matter. The evidence was all that the jury needed. The script that handwriting experts testified was written by Kelly and the detailed drawing of the interior of her house backed up the testimony. He referenced the 47 phone calls between Kelly and Greg that took place days before the murder and how that exchange suddenly stopped  afterward, asking the question as to why would that pattern of activity suddenly stop? The Verdict and Sentence In the end, it took the jury two short hours to return a verdict of guilty. During the penalty phase of the trial both sides fought hard, but again, after two hours the jury had made their decision: The state of Georgia versus Kelly Renee Gissendaner, verdict as to sentencing, we the jury find beyond a reasonable doubt that statutory aggravating circumstances do exist in this case. We the jury  fix the sentence of death... Since her conviction, Gissendaner has been incarcerated at Arrendale State Prison, where she is isolated since she is the only woman out of 84 death row inmates. Execution Scheduled Kelly Gissendaner was scheduled to die by lethal injection on February 25, 2015. However, the execution was postponed to March 2, 2015, due to bad weather conditions. Gissendaner exhausted all her appeals which included a 53-page application for clemency with testimonials from a former prison warden, members of the clergy and friends and family. The victims father, Doug Gissendaner, has fought equally hard to make certain that his  ex- daughter-in-laws  sentence is carried out. A statement released by the Gissendaner family after the appeal for clemency was rejected read: â€Å"This has been a long, hard, heartbreaking road for us. Now that this chapter in this nightmare is over, Doug would want us and all of the people who loved him to find peace, to remember all the happy times and cherish memories we have of him. We should all strive every day to be the kind of person he was. Never forget him. Gissendaner Executed September 29, 2015 After multiple eleventh-hour appeals and delays, Kelly Renee Gissendaner, Georgias only woman on death row, was executed by lethal injection, prison officials said. Scheduled to die at 7 p.m. Tuesday, she died by injection of  pentobarbital  at 12:21 a.m. Wednesday. The U.S. Supreme Court denied stays of execution three times Tuesday, Georgias state Supreme Court denied a stay and the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles declined to grant her clemency following a hearing at which Gissendaners supporters offered new testimony. Even Pope Francis became involved in the case, requesting mercy for the woman who conspired with her adulterous lover to stab her husband to death in February 1997. Gissendaner was the first woman executed in Georgia in 70 years. Footnotes: The murder occurred on February 7, 1997. Gissendaner was indicted on April 30, 1997, by the Gwinnett County Grand Jury for malice murder and felony murder. The State filed written  notice  of its intent to seek the death penalty on May 6, 1997. Gissendaners trial began on November 2, 1998, and the jury found her guilty of malice murder and felony murder on November 18, 1998. The felony murder conviction was vacated by operation of law. Malcolm v. State, 263 Ga. 369(4), 434 S.E.2d 479 (1993); ?OCGA  § 16-1-7. On November 19, 1998, the jury fixed Gissendaners sentence at death. Gissendaner filed a motion for a new trial on December 16, 1998, which she amended on August 18, 1999, and which was denied on August 27, 1999. Gissendaner filed a notice of appeal on September 24, 1999. This appeal was docketed on November 9, 1999, and orally argued on February 29, 2000. The Supreme Court turned down her appeal on July 5, 2000. The State Board of Pardons and Paroles rejected Gissendaners appeal for clemency on February 25, 2015.

Personnel procedures and the constitution Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Personnel procedures and the constitution - Essay Example Whereas before an entire crop of new positions had come upon each time that a new executive took the helm, such a provision ensured that it would be against the law for such an action to continue to take place. However, like many political actions, there were equal and opposite reactions. One of the largest negative reactions that the Pendleton Act evoked was the reliance of government on funds from the private sector and/or businesses. Due to the fact that hopeful executives could not longer rely on donations from hopeful applicants to guaranteed positions, this meant that the government put itself at the mercy of the business sector as a means of accruing revenue. Article Seven of the United States constitution specified how many states were required to ratify the US Constitution in order for it become law. As such, Article VII denotes that 9 of the 13 original colonies would need to ratify the Constitution prior to it becoming the founding charter and law of the newly formed United States. The first ten amendments to the US Constitution, collectively known as the Bill of Rights provides a rigid set of limitations on governmental power with regards to what the founders saw as the natural rights of the citizen. Though these Bill of Rights had little bearing on the way in which the individual states sought to exert their own power, the Fourteenth Amendment made it possible for these rights to be transferred explicitly to the state level. These first ten amendments were originally proposed and written by James Madison in 1789 and were ultimately ratified by 1791 for inclusion in the US Constitution. Although Madison himself proposed that there be 12 amendments, only 10 were ultimately passed and ratified by the states as law. These rights have become fundamental to an interpretation and understanding of what US