#law and order organized crim

[storiesofsvu]

happy thursday bitches

you know the drill

Wasn’t gonna say anything about organized crime cause im just not into it already BUT

Then the detective comes in all “my wife and I started the clinic” and I go WIFE?? WIFE!?! A QUEEERRRR!!! Then completely forgetting the Ayanna is standing right there who is ALSO A QUEER. Then she’s all “we got off on the wrong foot” AND HELLO the SHIFT in the air?! ESP when the other one goes “clinic worked so well it outlived my marriage, now im just married to the job” AND I TELL YOU I SQUEALED. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE can we get bell some happiness?!?!!? (yeah, yeah, yeah I know it’s a long ask as long as it’s a DW show, I know…)

Okay… ngl… I was writing a threesome smut piece instead of paying attention to mothership

But now we are onto svu

Finally

Okay… I liked Churlish in the previous eps, even with her ratting velasco out. But her brownnosing in this ep is already annoying me…

Ohhhh okay, so they had met in person. The intro made it seem like that was the first time theyd met

Omg muncy… vicious…

Okay, hold on… the pic wasn’t him, so zoey’s never seen what he actually looks like??

 Carisi looking great in the blue!!!!

This is fucked up also… wtf…

Oliva over here bringing up breeding kink…

WHAT the fuck….. I will admit… did not see that one coming woof.

Im happy that nia whatever her last name is at least playing the *same* attorney as she was years ago.

Ohhh nooo…..wow… fuck this attorney, fuck this

The turquoise blazer liv has on is amazing

Okay, that was a bomb and very fucked up episode so much so that my roommate came home halfway through the court scene and was immediately drawn to the tv to watch with me

Also good move carisi on turning the lights off. You’ve learnt well!!

#law and order spoilers #law an order svu #law and order organized crim #law and order

[docgold13]

Batman: The Animated Series - Paper Cut-Out Portraits and Profiles

Harvey Dent

Revered as a steadfast and tireless advocate of law and order, Harvey Dent had a reputation for producing results. After being made Gotham City's District Attorney, Dent doubled his efforts to root out corruption and take down organized crim.  Dent’s hard work was driven by his pursuit for justice as well as his desperate effort to cope with severe mental illness.   

Dent suffered from a dissociative identity disorder.  He found his angry and hateful feelings to be so intolerable, so dystonic, that they needed to be banished from his consciousness.  Years of suppressed anger reemerged in the form of a completely different persona; a persona that called itself ‘Big Bad Harv.’  Harvey was kind and composed and followed the letter of the law; whereas Big Bad Harv was vicious, impulsive and would restore to anything, even murder, to get his way.  The division between these two sides became so extreme that they were essentially two different people; two entities fighting one another for control.  

Dent worked with psychologist Nora Crest to help him understand and better contend with this matter.  As the pressures of his work and his efforts to be reelected District Attorney mounted, however, it became increasingly more difficult for Dent to manage his two sides.  When overly stressed or upset, Dent would experience fugue episodes where Big Bad Harv would take control and enact the aggressive impulses he had been holding in.  

Dent won his reelection by a landslide and he was finally planning on proposing to his longtime sweetheart Grace Lamont.  It was then that Dent was contacted by the mob boss, Rupert Thorne.  Thorne had pilfered Dr. Crest’s records and he threatened to expose Dent's psychological troubles the press unless Dent agreed to drop all legal pursuits against Thorne’s enterprises.  Dent snapped and Big Bad Harv took control.  He attacked Thorne and his men. In the ensuing scuffle Dent was caught in a terrible explosion.  

The explosion severely scarred the entire left half of Dent’s face, leaving him horribly disfigured.  The trauma resulted in the creation of a third persona within Dent’s mind, a persona that would maintain control over him for much of the rest of his life.  A person that called itself ‘Two-Face.’  

The terrific Richard Moll provided the voice of Harvey Dent, first appearing in the second episode of the first season of Batman: The Animated Series, ‘On Leather Wings.’  

#batman the animated series #Batman #Two-Face #Harvey Dent #Richard Moll #cut-out #paper art #dc comics

[mudaship39]

Warring Kingdoms:

S rank Templar Mage Hunter and Knight Templar Aasimar Osial:

   Beware the templar or mage hunter of the Templar order. Magic is a powerful and dangerous thing. There are those who use magic to aid their fellow humanoid and make the universe, multiverse, & omniverse a better place. But there are even more who seek to exploitation that power. This is the reason for magic hunters or templars of templar orders. They are the one that magic users fear the templars of the Templar Order magic hunters who root out those that abuse magic. Where the sinful would stand to gain the misery of others it is the magic hunters of the templar order stand alert against them. Corrupt practitioners of the arcane, esoteric, & magical arts such as witches, mages, wizards, sorcerers/sorceresses, warlocks, voodoo and hoodoo priestess/priestesses, & witch doctors must remain wary and cautious of the mage hunters as they are only so far behind them at any time. The destiny of a mage hunter is to let which they detest most control their life. For some that might be magic. For most that might be devils, demons, & archdemons. For some that might be the undead. For others that may be beasts, monsters, or creatures. The mage hunter has to take on which they loathe the most and let it saturate their entire essence of mind, heart, & soul until it changes them beyond recognition. This distinctive connection to the cause of their fury, rage, & wrath is most frequently tied to their perpetual love for one thing or another. She uses the magic and non-magic to kill magic users. Perhaps the templar or magic hunter only became what they hated to attain its power. Maybe the templar became what they hated to protect those they loved. No templar’s or magic hunter’s power and strength are innocent. This twisted power and strength regularly causes a magic hunter or templar to resent themselves. Only the most devoted and tempered of templars or mage hunters know that their sullied state is not only reasonable but if it is applied for the sake of their loved ones it can be a righteous and virtuous force for good. As a mage hunter or templar of the Templar Order Osial is a Knight Commander that is commander over a fire teams, squads, platoons, & companies of knight corporals, knight sergeants, knight lieutenants, & knight captains. The best word that often best describes these hunters is devoted. There are few who can compare to their loyalty and commitment to that of a templar or mage hunter. A magic hunter or templar is a warrior dedicated to suppressing unsafe magic and controlling dangerous magic users. That could mean a variety of things based on the ideals of the individual templar. A good well-meaning templar might be a sort of investigator rooting out wicked spellcasters who then wield the virtues of justice and law to bring them to justice. They are often using their gifts to help those harmed by dangerous magic. These templars empathize and sympathize with such people. Equally some templars are only interested in ending the lives of those considered a menace by their Templar Order. The question remained what kind of templar or magic user was Osial. She joined her Templar Order because she suffered a personal attack from a magic user. She then desired to gain magical power and strength for herself and saw the organization as a means to do so with the public’s support and favor. In every town, city, & metropolis there is crime. This crime oozes throughout the darkest parts of the slums and alleys and saturates and persists into every fragment of civilization. This crisis becomes worse when half of her city is made up of magic users such as alchemists, witches, voodoo and hoodoo priests/priestesses, warlocks, wizards, mages, and sorcerers/sorceresses. To fight against this are the esoteric enforcers. They call them justicars or templars. They are the police force that hunts down mages, sorcerers, templars, witches, & wizards. Their job is to find criminal spell casters and bring them to justice.   

After years of fighting she has come to the conclusion that no matter how strong her body will ever be. It will never will be as strong as the magical one. She has seen the great power of their spells and started fearing it. With time this fear become hatred and loathing. A great hatred towards mages and their kind. She started searching a way to make them feel as weak and feeble as she does in their presence. After a ton of research a book came in her pat. It a book about an extinct sect, the ts'ere-jira. This book might be an hundred pages of pure gibberish, but with each day you slowly start to decipher the meaning and the secret of its page and with it come a dark power. The Mage Breaker is a master of battle against the arcane arts. A powerful force on the battlefield where mages wreak havoc against armies, they work to undermine the effectiveness of even the most potent spells. As an archetype of a Mage hunter you have always had a sense to the wrong doings of those that chose to abuse their gifts. Must be of either good or evil alignment to use this subclass and must have a mentor that has either past on or is still fighting the good fight. She as a templar and mage hunter is a mageslayer.  Some fighters, realizing the inherent weakness their fighting style has against magic, decide to educate themselves and train both physically and mentally against the arcane. In doing so, they pick up on some magical tricks and learn to quell their enemies' abilities through sheer force of will. 

[basvanleeuwenadvocaat]

Van Leeuwen Law Firm

Deelnemen via CMS - Van Leeuwen Law Firmhttps://vanleeuwenlawfirm.eu › knowledge-sharing › de...

U kunt op alle (mobiele) apparaten deelnemen aan een online zitting via Cisco Meeting Server (CMS). Het is niet nodig om vooraf een app te downloaden.

Data Privacy - Van Leeuwen Law Firmhttps://vanleeuwenlawfirm.eu › data...

Vertaal deze pagina

VAN LEEUWEN LAW FIRM assists businesses in connection with the preparation and implementation of Internet & IT charters, code of conducts and whistleblowing ...

Insolvency and Restructuring - Van Leeuwen Law Firmhttps://vanleeuwenlawfirm.eu › inso...

Vertaal deze pagina

VAN LEEUWEN LAW FIRM advises companies and group of companies on the best way to structure or remodel their legal framework for continuing operations in the ...

Knowledge sharing - Van Leeuwen Law Firmhttps://vanleeuwenlawfirm.eu › kno...

Vertaal deze pagina

145-b) was very important for the development of the Dutch Criminal Law. As a result of this famous judgment, the Netherlands Minister of Justice requested the ...

Reputation Management Solutions - Van Leeuwen Law Firmhttps://vanleeuwenlawfirm.eu › capabilities › reputation...

Iemands identiteit wordt gevormd door wie men is, wat men doet, de normen en waarden waarvoor men staat, hoe men zich kleedt en op welke wijze men zich ...

Insolventie en Herstructurering - Van Leeuwen Law Firmhttps://vanleeuwenlawfirm.eu › capabilities › industries

VAN LEEUWEN LAW FIRM kan u bijstaan om buiten de rechtbank om contractuele afspraken te maken, maar ook om via een gerechtelijke procedure resoluut op te treden ...

Transparency of legal fees - Van Leeuwen Law Firmhttps://vanleeuwenlawfirm.eu › tran...

Vertaal deze pagina

If you'd prefer to rule out any financial surprises at the end of the day, the best option is to agree beforehand on a set price. In most cases, it's fairly ...

Criminal Law | Related Expertises – Van Leeuwen Law Firmhttps://vanleeuwenlawfirm.eu › crim...

Vertaal deze pagina

In order to prevent, deter and mitigate Corporate Fraud, organizations have to (a) assess their corporate fraud risk, (b) set-up and strengthen their ...

Bijzondere Bijstand van de Gemeente voor de eigen bijdrage ...https://vanleeuwenlawfirm.eu › het-kantoor › bijzonder...

VAN LEEUWEN LAW FIRM hecht er grote waarde aan om vanuit haar maatschappelijke verantwoordelijkheid pro bono-werkzaamheden ...

Eerwraak - Van Leeuwen Law Firmhttps://vanleeuwenlawfirm.eu › familie-en-jeugdrecht

Vreest u voor eergerelateerd geweld (ook wel: eerwraak) van de kant van uw (ex-)partner en/of (schoon)familieleden. In de media zijn de laatste jaren enkele ...Advertenties

[thenervespore]

5/8 Assessment Time

Hello Neurospora legalese.

Looking back at the things I wrote here in re my coping and organizing process for the bar...well, to be honest, I am a little bit all around the place.

If you look at my wall, I only posted calendars for the months of May and June. I have NO calendar for July. I have a calendar in August but I did not print it. Now, I have NO calendar for September ALSO. Why the fuck? Well, to be honest...calendars really aren’t my thing. So I am going to relay here that even if I only formally stuck to the calendar method until June, I am not worried that my learning process is compromised or discontinuous. 

This is where I am going to say that I just have to trust to my process when I was still in law school. I never created calendars in law school. However, I have this idea of how I am going to deal around things in my head. I always trusted my intuition and it never failed me. I just have to keep trusting on it. 

And maybe I don’t have a formal calendar because I already relied to the calendar of the review center I am doing my mocks - Baste.

So when I enrolled in Baste in JULY, I saw their calendar - when they are going to conduct the mocks. So the schedule of the mock bars of course are fixed in my Google Calendar.

Just a side note, the time I also enrolled in Baste for my mock bar, I got an anxiety attack about my entire review process. Belonging to the Top 5 of our class, I am a scholar of ChanRobles Review Center so I enrolled there free of charge. Their materials are preuploaded and you just can access any of them anytime depending on what you want to watch. At first, I was eager to listen to every video materials they have. However, I found myself tired of the readings already to still watch videos. I tried so many times but I end up just thinking, maybe I NEEDED to rest during this time so that I can absorb better by the time I am going to study for the next day. So I just banked on the idea that RESTING is part of the process. You cannot read 8 hours in a day and watch 4 hours of lecture in a day then sleep and repeat. Other people might withstand that but not me. I got insecure on so many levels (because I only alot 4 hours of study time in a day) and by this time I am almost solely relying on reading and not on lectures. What if new doctrinal concepts are taught to them that I missed? So I thought of taking it to the next step and enroll the full program of Baste. I have to weigh in many matters. For one, it is very expensive. So MONEY REALLY IS AN ISSUE FOR ME. Then I remember the fact about me that I am not really an auditory learner, I learn most of the things from what I read. And I also remember the time when I was eager to watch lectures after reading stuff but I end up not absorbing anything either because I was so saturated or my attention was elsewhere. So I decided not to push through. However, this was the time when I thought that even if I did not enroll in their full program, I am going to follow their schedule. I cannot access their materials but I am going to rely on the materials that I already have and of course, trust and believe that Ateneo crammed in a hell of a strong foundation to its students. 

SO END OF SIDE NOTE.

Back to the Calendar.

Example of their calendar:

So by this time, I already had my two calendars when I saw that Baste already had a calendar until the end. I analyzed their schedule and found their program compatible with me. So in a nutshell, these are the features of their schedule:

1. They follow the reverse mirror method, meaning the subjects for the last week are to be studied earlier in time until the subjects for the first week (Rem, Legal Ethics, Commercial, Crim, Civil, Tax, Poli, Labor in that order) AND

2. They only do ONE ROUND until November.

The second feature of their exam is the more compelling one for me. In my study method, I find it difficult to cope and conform to the two reading schedules of people (where a bar subject is studied in a week). I ended up pushing myself to my limits and not really enjoying the process of reading. Why is that so? Because inevitably, if you have to cram up everything in one week, you have to read FASTER and you have to read LONGER HOURS. At first, I said to myself, I am going to follow the schedule of others where they read 8 hours or more in a day. 

BUT THAT HAS NEVER BEEN ME. I can only absorb material in a 4 hour study span in a day. That has always been my narrative.

I really tried. Really. Honestly. To study for more than my usual limit. But it ENDED UP BACKFIRING ON ME. I can’t think straight. I can’t even figure out what the hell do these words I am reading mean! I said to myself...WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS THAT I UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM READING. That is the only vantage point acceptable. It is not about how many reading you have. People might absorb things in a faster pace but I honestly cannot take more than 50 pages of material in a day. Hell, if the subject is intricate, I can withstand LESSER. 

The primary consideration why I conformed to the Baste schedule is because it allows me to think through things consciously. It is not so fast that you can’t understand what you are reading anymore but it is not so slow that you have to be self-conscious if you are at par with your peers. 

And it allowed me to have moments where I can think, reflect and assess. 

You know, that is why I established this bar journal...because I have always believed that journaling has always helped me pass through difficult situations in my life. I always had a journal since Grade 5. LITERALLY. This is the second online journal I have. And I also have five physical journals since elementary.

SOOOO GOING BACK TO MY SCHEDULING. I CONFORM MY READING TO WHEN I HAVE TO TAKE THE MOCK BAR.

So I consider the exam date as the date when I have to be absolutely prepared for that subject. So for example, if the schedule of the mock bar for Tax is October 1, I have to study everything about taxation before that. By the time that I take the exam, I absolutely have no materials opened. I rely on what I read and if there are things that I do not know, I find ways how to bluff. In other words, I simulate the situation as if it is the actual bar. And I do it all the time. 

Actually, another review center is always two weeks earlier than Baste so for Crim and Commercial, I took their exam BEFORE studying for the bar subject. I did them without anything open to honestly assess what are the areas I should focus on studying. 

IF YOU ARE ALSO GOING TO LOOK AT THE BASTE SCHED, the sub-subjects of a bar sub is thought in a very methodical manner. That is the thing that I did not really schedule. I just set the day I am going to end in a bar subject but I just approximate and usually just fix weekly goals - not daily goals. I did not fix daily goals because I tend to be so hard on myself that it backfires to me (I felt burned down after a while). 

So at the end of the day, the bottom line is even if I do not have a formal printed detailed calendar, I think I have a solid and rational method. 

JUST CONTINUE WITH THE GRIT AND FAITH. 

Signing off for now.

[bluewatsons]

Muhammad Asif & Don Weenink, Vigilante rituals theory: A cultural explanation of vigilante violence, Eur J Crim (OnlineFirst, 2019)

Abstract

This contribution offers a new theory of vigilante violence: vigilante rituals theory. We argue that vigilante violence originates from fear, righteous anger, and retaliatory punitive desire that stems from violations of moral imperatives, which are Durkheimian sacred values. We argue that morally outraged people transform their fear and anger into violent action through mobilization and bodily alignment in vigilante rituals. These rituals can restore the integrity of moral imperatives and generate the unity of the in-group. Further, we propose the following variable socio-legal conditions that affect the likelihood for vigilante rituals to occur: legal legitimacy, an exposure to violence, and authorities’ encouragement of (violent) self-help. We conclude by noting how the theory advances prevailing explanations and how it can be used in future empirical research.

Introduction

Why do civilians collectively take the law into their own hands and use violence to punish offenders? Why are thieves and robbers, when caught red-handed, more likely to face public punishment by civilians in some African and Asian countries? Why do some Hindus kill Muslim beef eaters in certain parts of India? And why do some people lynch (alleged) blasphemers in Pakistan? These questions relate to vigilante violence. So far, this phenomenon has been taken up in the domain of policing studies mainly. In this tradition of research, the reasoning is that, when people perceive the police and legal authorities to be legitimate and effective, they cooperate and obey the directives of the authorities (Jackson et al., 2013, 2014; Sunshine and Tyler, 2003; Tyler and Huo, 2002), but, when they regard them as illegitimate and ineffective, they tend to employ their own style of self-justice, including vigilante violence (Goldstein, 2003; Nivette, 2016; Tankebe, 2009; Tankebe and Asif, 2016). However, even when people perceive the police as legitimate and effective, they may turn to vigilante violence. For instance, people may not want to wait for legal proceedings but rather prefer to punish the offender themselves and exert social control (Black, 1983). Moreover, historical and contemporary incidents indicate that political and legal authorities have encouraged vigilante violence (Brundage, 1997; Colombijn, 2002; Handy, 2004). Hence, the question is what makes people susceptible to the idea of punishing offenders themselves aside from a mere lack of trust in police and legal institutions. This article attempts to develop a cultural explanation of vigilante violence. We suggest that people perceive some values – ‘moral imperatives’ – as essential to their group identity. Behavior that violates such moral imperatives arouses strong emotions, such as fear, righteous anger, and a desire for punitive action. We argue that these emotions are mobilized and transformed into collective violent action through vigilante rituals, in which participants restore the integrity of moral imperatives and reinforce the unity of the group by punishing offenders. These punishments often take the form of public performances, ranging from shaming, slapping, torturing, or lynching the offenders (see Buckser, 1992; Patterson, 1999; Young, 2005). We propose several socio-legal conditions that could affect the likelihood of such vigilante rituals to develop. Under these conditions, we argue, people are motivated and feel justified to engage in violent responses to encroachments on moral imperatives rather than leaving it to the police.

This article contributes to the existing literature in the following ways. First, whereas prevailing research has focused on police and legal legitimacy primarily to explain vigilante violence, we incorporate a more elaborated set of micro-sociological processes and socio-legal conditions to understand this phenomenon. Second, most earlier work discussed the relationship between culture and violence in particular contexts (for example, the southern region of the US – see Nisbett and Cohen, 1996), except for a few studies that accommodated culturally diverse vigilante practices (Pratten and Sen, 2007; Senechal de la Roche, 1996, 2001). However, we argue that the relationship between culture and vigilante violence should be seen as variable. Therefore, a theory is required that explains the conditions under which culture, more specifically the violation of moral imperatives, can bring about violent vigilante action. Third, we intend to follow up on Vaisey’s work (2009) on how culture both motivates and justifies actors’ choices of action as part of meaning making. We invoke the notion of vigilante rituals to conceptualize how people use culture to intensify and channel emotions, to mobilize participants, and to motivate and justify violent punishments.

In what follows we elaborate our working definition of vigilante violence, describe relevant theories on the relationship between culture and violence, and then explain our theoretical model in detail. Finally, we summarize our contribution and discuss how the theory can be used in empirical research.

Vigilante violence and moral imperatives

Prior studies of vigilante violence have provided valuable contributions by describing its forms, intensity, motivating sources, and purposes (Abrahams, 1987, 2003; Adinkrah, 2005; Brown, 1975; Harnischfeger, 2003; Johnston, 1996; Karmen, 2016; Rosenbaum and Sederberg, 1974; Senechal de la Roche, 1996). Abrahams (2003: 26) defines vigilantism as ‘an organized attempt by a group of “ordinary citizens” to enforce norms and maintain law and order on behalf of their communities, often by resort to violence’. Vigilante violence is also referred to as instant justice (Harnischfeger, 2003), spontaneous action (Adinkrah, 2005; Karmen, 2016), popular justice (Senechal de la Roche, 1996: 98), or self-help (Black, 1983; Tankebe, 2009), by voluntary private citizens (Johnston, 1996) enforcing local norms (Kloos, 2014; Baker, 2002), preserving social stability (Sederberg, 1978), and attaining social control (Black, 1983; Senechal de la Roche, 1996), by implying relevant cultural templates (Pratten and Sen, 2007).

To demarcate our domain of interest, we propose the following working definition, which follows these prior descriptions and adds new elements to it. We describe vigilante violence as rituals in which participants are mobilized to transform fear and righteous anger into purposive (premeditated or more or less immediate) reactive or preventive unlawful violent action to punish violations of moral imperatives to restore or uphold the moral community.

The new elements we introduce are as follows. First, we emphasize that vigilante violence is social interaction, which takes the form of rituals: repetitive patterns of action sequences, meanings, and purposes that are recognized by the participants. Vigilante rituals, as we will explain below, can transform fear and righteous anger into collective violent action, they generate feelings of group membership, and they restore the integrity of the moral imperative. We consider these rituals as a necessary but variable micro-sociological process that increases the likelihood for vigilante violence to occur. Note that such rituals could comprise both premeditated responses and immediate, more impulsive reactions. Prior literature on vigilantism has described the phenomenon as a planned and organized act of violence in public mostly (Abrahams, 2003; Johnston, 1996). However, little attention has been paid to how the mobilization of vigilantes works, whether it is premeditated or more immediate. As for rapid mobilization, this happens when a group of people immediately recognize a violation of a moral imperative and act upon it. For instance, yelling catchwords such as ‘thief, ‘thief!’ makes people start running to chase the offender immediately in some societies (for Indonesia, see Colombijn, 2002; for Ghana, see Adinkrah, 2005). In these cases, we argue, people have developed an alertness and an ability to mutually align rapidly, owing not only to a high prevalence of crimes in their neighborhood but also to a shared understanding that robbers and thieves must be punished on the spot.

The second new element in our definition of vigilante violence is moral imperatives. We propose that each group shares some core values that are seen as essential, eternal, and sacred – sacred in the Durkheimian sense of having extraordinary (non-profane) meaning and of being forbidden to be touched, manipulated, or changed (Durkheim, [1912] 1995: 35). These values are not sociological reifications, but they play a crucial role in the social identity of individuals: how people see themselves as members of a group and the value and emotional significance they attach to such belonging (Tajfel, 1981: 255). To belong to a moral community – a group that shares a set of moral imperatives – means to experience transcendence: being part of something larger than individual existence.

Our notion of moral imperatives partly aligns with the Kantian notion of categorical imperatives, which are values that make individuals feel they ought to act (Crisp, 2013). Applying this notion to vigilante responses, we propose that individuals feel obliged to react when they sense that such imperatives are violated – desecrated indeed. The ability to make moral judgements has a biological grounding and is not restricted to humans (De Waal, 2009). However, the specific form that moral imperatives take depends on culture, how people learn from each other over time. Therefore, moral imperatives are not universals; instead they vary between social groups and over time (Tavory, 2011). Furthermore, the intensity and the type of responses to violations of moral imperatives vary from group to group, or from culture to culture. Let us provide two examples of violations of moral imperatives in relation to vigilante violence to make this clear.

A first example is blasphemy. In many societies, violations of religious beliefs are felt as serious attacks against a community, which require retaliatory measures. Consider the lynching of Mishal Khan, a university student who was falsely accused of posting blasphemous material online at Abdul Wali Khan University, Mardan, Pakistan in April 2017. After the spread of rumors regarding blasphemy, students assembled in large crowds to hear public speeches about the misdeeds of Khan and the religious obligation to punish him. By yelling rhythmically together, the students created a shared mood of hate and the desire for revenge. After Khan was dragged out of his dormitory, they brutally beat him up and later shot him.

A second moral imperative that is often linked to vigilante violence concerns the sexual abuse of children. Child molestation is considered one of the most serious crimes in societies around the world. For instance, the abuse of Sarah Payne was followed by moral outrage in the UK, which paved the way for a ‘Sarah’s Law’. This law provided public availability of the identity of pedophiles through the Sex Offenders Register (for details, see Critcher, 2002). Such ‘community protection’ movements and subsequent enactment of laws have already taken place in the US and Canada (Petrunik, 2003; Simon, 2000). In both countries, it has been reported that anti-pedophile vigilante groups punish and sometimes kill suspected pedophiles (Broomfield, 2016; Krishnan, 2017).

The third new element in our working definition comprises the role that emotions play in vigilante violence, notably fear, righteous anger, and a desire for retaliation. Violations of moral imperatives arouse survival responses of fear and anger because they endanger the core of the social identity of individuals. The anger is righteous because, as Durkheim ([1893] 1997) argued, people feel that the offense encroaches on their ‘collective conscience’ or, in our terminology, their moral community. In the eyes of vigilantes, the offenders have not just hurt or caused damage to an individual fellow group member or symbol, but their acts are seen as an attack against the group as a whole. Therefore, their rage transcends their individual existence, which allows or even obliges them to retaliate on behalf of a community that shares the moral imperative. ‘Righteous slaughter’, as Katz (1988: chapter 2) notes, is, in the eyes of those who commit it, a form of ‘community service’ or ‘moral garbage collection’. The same holds for the vigilante punishment of offenders who violate moral imperatives. Vigilantes employ moral reasoning to justify their violent actions, which were initially aroused by emotions (Haidt, 2012).

The three new elements in our working definition of vigilante violence provide a conceptualization of how culture shapes violent behavior: encroachments on moral imperatives arouse fear and righteous anger, which is intensified, channeled, and transformed into violent action through vigilante rituals. Before we elaborate the theory in more detail, let us consider how prior work has conceptualized the link between culture and vigilante violence.

Prior work on culture and vigilante violence

Earlier studies that relate culture to violence have conceptualized the former concept mainly as ‘culture-as-value’ (Swidler, 1986), or, according to Vaisey (2008), a ‘Socratic model of action’, whereby people use culture to categorize things as good or bad, right or wrong, desirable or undesirable, and so on, which then somehow translates into action. This view has been influential in sociology, ranging from Weber’s notion of value rational action to Parson’s voluntary theory of action, and it appears in many contemporary theories of violence too. In the ‘southern culture of violence’ tradition of research, for example, the culture-as-value model appears as an explanation of the relatively high rates of violence in southern states of the US (Ellison, 1991; Ellison, Burr, and McCall, 2003; Nisbett and Cohen, 1996). Two main narratives ground the relation between cultural values and violent behavior in this tradition. First, the idea that values about autonomy and the appropriateness of violent responses to protect autonomy were exported to the US South by Scottish-Irish migrants, comprising former herders who relied on violent self-help strategies against threats from bands of thieves and robbers (Fischer, 1989; Nisbett and Cohen, 1996). The second narrative is known as the ‘conservative Protestant thesis’ (Lee, 2006; Lee et al., 2007). The argument is that conservative Protestants are more likely to accept some forms of violence, such as self-defense against perceived attacks against personal honor or one’s family or property. As Lee (2006: 311) explains, this religion’s view of justified violent punishment is grounded on literalist interpretations of the Bible that cite the use of violence to resolve various types of disputes as well as the use of violence as justified retributions from God (Ellison, 1991; Ellison et al., 2003; Sowell, 2005). However, neither cultural explanation shows, in the here and now of a specific situation, how people decide to engage in violence as a line of action. There is still a wide gap between values of independence and notions about the appropriate uses of violence on the one hand and actual violent behavior on the other.

Ann Swidler (1986) developed an alternative conceptualization of the relationship between culture and behavior. She argued that culture provides people with a flexible set of lines of action (repertoires). Applied to violence, Lee and Ousey (2011) conducted a qualitative vignette study in the state of Louisiana, posing potentially threatening situations to the participants to understand how they would negotiate the situation. They found that violence was seen as a situationally viable response in specific situations only, and that these ideas were shared among diverse categories of people (males and females, blacks and whites, the young and the older). Culture provided them with various toolkits for action (including violence) and situational features such as police presence and reliability and the severity of the potential threat to the individuals and their family determined which line of action (violent or not) they deemed appropriate or effective. Although the notion of repertoires of action allows for a dynamic view of culture that offers more room for individuals to act, there remains a gap in the understanding of how repertoires move people into action.

In Fiske and Rai’s Virtuous Violence, culture appears as a set of ideal models of relationships (2015: xxii–xxiii, 1–2, 56). Most violence, they argue, stems from a moral motivation to regulate relationships according to these ideals. The predominant ideal model that plays out in vigilante violence is ‘communal sharing’, in which unity, the integrity of the in-group, is the central moral motivation (Fiske and Rai, 2015: 18–19). As we have argued above, violations of moral imperatives are perceived as attacks against the group’s integrity. In their discussion of the lynchings of blacks in the US South, Fiske and Rai (2015: 206–7) note that this form of vigilante violence aimed to realize not only the moral motive of unity but also that of hierarchy (the ideal model of ‘authority ranking’); the public torturing, killing, and mutilating of lower-class black males who were accused of sexually assaulting white females – accusations of rape were among the most frequent motivations and led to the most brutal forms of violence in the US South (Clarke, 1998; Hill, 2010) – not only aimed to restore the purity of white females and the concomitant integrity of the white in-group, but also served to maintain the hierarchy between whites and blacks. We will take up the role of maintaining hierarchy in vigilante violence later, when we discuss the collectivization of vigilante violence. Considering the role that culture plays, we conclude that, when the ideal model of ‘communal sharing’ is predominant, vigilante violence as a repertoire for action becomes more likely because violations of moral imperatives are experienced as attacks against the unity of a group (Fiske and Rai, 2015: 18). The threat arouses fear and anger. However, emotions are, in the words of Frijda (1987), ‘action tendencies’. So we need to conceptualize the process that transforms fear and righteous anger into violent vigilante action. Second, we need to provide an understanding of how violent vigilante action restores feelings of group unity (see Fiske and Rai, 2015). Let us follow Durkheim’s lead once again and consider the ritualistic qualities of vigilante violence in more detail.

Vigilante rituals

Tilly’s The Politics of Collective Violence (2003) is helpful to get closer to the situational processes at play in vigilante violent action. Tilly (2003: 15) distinguishes two dimensions of collective violence: the degree of coordination among violent actors and the salience of immediate damage. Vigilante violence is typically the result of a high degree of coordination and it produces often severe damage, which is however confined in time and space. Vigilante violent action can be perceived as ‘violent rituals’ in which ‘at least one well-defined and coordinated group follows a known interaction script entailing the infliction of damage on itself or on others as it competes for priority within a recognized arena’ (Tilly, 2003: 15). Thus, for vigilante violence to be recognized as a form of moral punishment by co-perpetrators, victims, and the public, vigilantes must follow a pre-given – ritualistic – set of action patterns as they prepare, perform, and complete the punishment. Tilly identifies three situational processes at work in violent rituals. First, he notes that they provide an ‘unusually sharp definition to the identities in play’, to the point of muting relationships that cross the identity boundaries that are activated in the rituals (Tilly, 2003: 84). Second, Tilly argues that violent rituals ‘incorporate all the relevant actors and social sites into a single connected set of performances’ (2003: 84). Third, he notes the process of ‘containment’: ‘the placement of a relatively impermeable perimeter around an actor, set of actors, place or other social site’ (Tilly, 2003: 85). We conclude that violent rituals generate Fiske and Rai’s in-group unity in three ways: they collapse social relationships into binary us–them distinctions, they align the actions of participants following a known interaction script, and they bring them together into a social event that is delimited in time and space.

But to understand how violent rituals attain such unitary powers, we need to get closer to the micro-sociological dynamics. In his analysis of religious rituals, Durkheim ([1912] 1995) noted that gatherings of people can bring about feelings of group unity. The bodily alignment processes that bring about such feelings are specified and systematized in Randall Collins’ (2004) interaction ritual theory. Collins (2004: 48) outlines four ingredients – we see them as stages in bodily alignment – that make up interaction rituals. The first is an assembly of bodily co-present people. In our case, this would mean that people should be around to notice or be alerted to the (alleged) violation of a moral imperative. The second ingredient is (the creation of) boundaries vis-à-vis outsiders; participants must develop a sense of who is part of the group whose moral imperative is encroached on. People can do this by clustering together in public space. When they create spatial-bodily arrangements, for example by forming a line or circular shape oriented towards the offenders of a moral imperative and those who accuse them, participants demarcate the space where the action will be performed. Participants in vigilante rituals thus differentiate between an onlooking, supportive audience and a set of individuals who are performing a public trial and punishment. Thus, the lynchings in the US South were often observed by a large crowd of supportive third parties (Clarke, 1998: 270; Fiske and Rai, 2015: 207; Patterson, 1999). At this point, participants have developed a mutual focus of attention, the third ingredient. The final, fourth ingredient of interaction rituals is the development of a shared mood. In our case, this means that feelings of fear and righteous anger are collectively shared and expressed. The bodily alignment processes that make up interaction rituals – most notably the reinforcing feedback between a focus of attention and the development of a shared mood – generate feelings of group membership and a willingness for taking action (Collins, 2004: 48; see, for empirical studies of how bodily alignment creates group feelings, Kühn et al., 2010; Páez et al., 2015). As indicated earlier, we consider vigilante rituals to be a necessary but variable condition for vigilante violence to occur. The intensity of the micro-sociological processes in them varies, and they may fail to produce the degree of bodily alignment required to transform anger and fear into violent action.

Figures 1 and 2 show bodily alignment in vigilante rituals that occurred in Pakistan. Figure 1 displays the mobilization of a group towards punitive action, and in Figure 2 the focus of the ritual was on the punishment of the offenders.

Figure 1. Bodily alignment in a vigilante ritual: Mobilization of a group. Notes: Participants synchronizing their bodies in a vigilante ritual prior to the lynching. Caption taken from the source: ‘Pakistani Christians chant slogans during a demonstration to condemn the suicide bombing attack on two churches, Sunday, March 15, 2015 in Karachi, Pakistan’. Source: Independent, 25 March 2015. URL (accessed 23 October 2019): https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistan-lynching-witness-describes-moment-crowd-murdered-and-burned-two-innocent-men-10117366.html

Figure 2. Bodily alignment in a vigilante ritual: Punishment of the offender. Notes: An aligned audience has formed a circle, focusing on perpetrators. Caption taken from the source: ‘Enraged Christian residents burn men they suspected of being involved in bomb attacks on churches, after lynching them in Lahore Pakistan’. Source: Independent, 25 March 2015. URL (accessed 23 October 2019): https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistan-lynching-witness-describes-moment-crowd-murdered-and-burned-two-innocent-men-10117366.html.

The objects (of whatever kind) that had been the focus of collective attention during the interaction ritual can turn into symbols of group membership after the ritual. In the case of vigilante violence, they can take the form of storytelling after the fact, phone-recorded videos of a lynching or bodily remains that are left for public display. As Gould (1999, 2000) demonstrated for Corsican vendettas, violence evidences group strength and solidarity. The circulation of symbols of vigilante violence reminds people of the unity of the group and their collective power to protect moral imperatives.

Fiske and Rai provide an interesting argument as to why vigilante violence takes the form of rituals in which participants attain bodily alignment. They note that, in the communal sharing ideal model, people make their bodies ‘equivalent’ (Fiske and Rai, 2015: 253). They do so by clothing, insignia, and other manipulations of body surfaces and, most notably, by making rhythmic synchronous movements, which, as they note, ‘have strong bonding effects because participants experience their congruently moving bodies as merging into one’ (Fiske and Rai, 2015: 253; see also Kühn et al., 2010; Páez et al., 2015). Fiske and Rai (2015: 253) also predict that violence to realize moral motives (for example, creating unity or hierarchy) conforms with distinct ways of regulating relationships. Because bodily alignment is the predominant way of realizing the unity of the in-group, it can be expected that vigilante violence aims at the disruption and mutilation of the victim’s body, rather than just hurting or killing the victim (see Brundage, 1993, 1997; Clarke, 1998). The mutilation of body parts can be seen as markings, inscribed on the offenders’ bodies on behalf of the moral community. It also happens that the offenders’ dead bodies are displayed for some time, so that the community can witness that the moral order and the in-group unity have been restored (Raper, 1933). However, in empirical reality vigilante violence also appears in more restrained forms, for instance in punishment rituals where the public are invited to slap or hit an offender. We expect that the severity of vigilante violence is related to the importance of the moral imperative that is (allegedly) attacked.

Incidents of vigilante violence may involve just one ritual, for instance when bystanders halt, align their bodies to create a performance stage in public space, focus their attention, and encourage others to punish a robber caught red-handed. Studies of vigilante punishments that are related to property crimes such as theft, robbery, and burglary note that they are usually spontaneous and quick (Karmen, 2016 Silke, 2001). In other cases, vigilante violence involves subsequent series of rituals, in which crowds are mobilized for upcoming violent action. Such rallies often involve yelling and the shouting of slogans to attain bodily synchronization (see Figure 2 and the lynching of Mishal Khan in Pakistan described above).

Earlier work on vigilante violence pointed to its ritualistic qualities, and some studies explicitly perceive the lynchings of blacks by whites in the US South as rituals, although without noting that they generate group unity and restore the moral order. Young (2005: 639–40, 664) refers to lynchings as ‘pre-scripted performances or ritualistic practices’ because they were orchestrated (advertisements in local newspapers announced the date, time, location, and even the schedule of activities of the lynchings), spectacular social events that followed a more or less fixed program of cruelty, attracting large crowds of whites (see also Clarke, 1998: 270; Fiske and Rai, 2015: 207; Patterson, 1999 ). Lynchings were not just rituals in form however. Young (2005: 641–8) also notes that they transformed the bodies of the accused persons into ‘souvenirs’. The horrendous practice of white participants to collect parts of lynched black bodies not only shows the apparent need to remember the punishment as an important event, but also demonstrates how the accused body underwent a ritualistic transformation into an object charged with multiple meanings, for instance about white power, the event itself, or black people (Young 2005: 641–8). In our terminology, vigilante rituals transformed black bodies into symbols, objects that had been the focus of attention, now charged with feelings of group unity and its power to punish those who violate moral imperatives.

Buckser (1992: 18), in his ‘Lynching as ritual in the American South’, argues that lynchings were performed as ‘community recreations’ and ‘community retribution’ by whites. In Buckser’s (1992: 24) view, the ritual character of lynchings appears in the parallel judicial proceedings that were used by the lynchers, because ‘the victim was accused of a crime, hunted down, presented before witness, tried, made to confess, read a verdict, and ceremonially executed’. Finally, in his ‘Rituals of blood: Sacrificial murders in the postbellum South’, Patterson (1999: 126) perceives lynching as religious sacrificial rituals which were ‘full of drama and play’, often incited by the rhetoric of priest or ministers, frequently occurring on Sundays, and usually performed in public spaces. In line with Young, he notes that these rituals produced special objects – symbols of group unity: the stakes and other objects of torture became relics to be treasured and the site of the sacrifice became a shrine. Patterson, emphasizing the link between religion and vigilante rituals, brings us back to Durkheim ([1912] 1995) again, who argued that religious rituals produce the ideas (symbols) that the group forms of itself.

So far, we have arrived at a theoretical understanding of the micro-sociological processes that generate vigilante violence. However, the question remains of why people would engage in such violence collectively, as perpetrators and as encouraging audience. Senechal de la Roche (2001) elaborated the role of status hierarchy and relational distance to explain the conditions under which (vigilante) violence collectivizes. This happens when people take sides, which is, in the words of Black (1998: 127), ‘a joint function of the social closeness and superiority of one side and the social remoteness and inferiority of the other’, or, to put it succinctly, partisanship of third parties goes to the higher-status and more intimate party. In the US South, Afro-Americans of varying status were lynched but those who were of lower status and/or more relationally distant from the local community were more likely to be victims (see Brundage, 1993, 1997). In contrast, lower-status Afro-Americans sometimes escaped lynching when they received protection from high-status whites who were relationally close to the alleged offender (Wright, 1996). Senechal de la Roche (2001: 131) concluded: ‘it was not the case that any black who offended a white was in danger of being lynched. The likelihood of a lynching depended on who offended whom – especially the degree of intimacy between the alleged offender and victim and the social status of each.’ Applied to vigilante violence more generally, this would mean that people are more likely to unite against alleged offenders of moral imperatives when the latter are of lower social status and when they are relationally distant from them.

Finally, although it might be possible in sporadic cases that an outraged and motivated individual commits vigilante violence alone, we think that such individual actions are socially informed and require the moral support of an outraged group, which can take an imagined, virtual form too, in the mind of the individual vigilante.

Socio-legal conditions that shape the development of vigilante violence

The first condition that shapes the likelihood for vigilante rituals to develop concerns legal legitimacy. A tradition of research demonstrates that when people perceive authorities as illegitimate, they can pose a challenge to the legal system by resorting to an alternate system of redress and grievances, that is, self-help, which can take the form of vigilante violence (Abrahams, 1998; Adinkrah, 2005; Baker; 2002; Goldstein, 2003; Silke, 2001; Tankebe, 2009). Thus, the relationship between vigilante violence and legal legitimacy has been studied in various countries including Nigeria (Baker, 2002; Harnischfeger, 2003; Smith, 2004), Ghana (Adinkrah, 2005; Tankebe, 2009), Pakistan (Tankebe and Asif, 2016), Bolivia (Goldstein, 2003), the Netherlands (Haas et al., 2014), Brazil (Benevidez and Ferreira, 1991), South Africa (Buur and Jensen, 2004), Tanzania (Abrahams, 1987), Guatemala (Handy, 2004), the United Kingdom (Silke, 2001), Israel (Weisburd, 1988), Indonesia (Colombijn, 2002, 2018; Kloos, 2014), Latin America (Nivette, 2016), and the United States (Garland, 2005; Hill, 2010; Kil et al., 2009; Tucker, 1985). Tyler (1990) was the first who initiated a debate on the relationship between legal legitimacy (police and courts) and citizens’ cooperation with the legal authorities. He operationalized legitimacy as (a) people’s general sense of obligation to obey the law, and (b) their support for legal authorities (that is, police and courts). Alternatively, Bottoms and Tankebe (2012) viewed legal legitimacy as a multidimensional concept including lawfulness, procedural justice, and effectiveness. Later studies attempted to find correlations between components of legal legitimacy and public support for vigilante violence in one or the other way. Tankebe (2009) used household survey data collected from Accra, Ghana, and revealed that the perception of police trustworthiness was the main indicator of public support for vigilantism. In another study, Tankebe and Asif (2016) found that police illegality (corruption) and procedural justice partially predicted support for vigilantism in a household survey in Lahore, Pakistan. Haas et al. (2014) demonstrated that diffused confidence in the police was related to public support for vigilantism in the Netherlands. Jackson et al. (2013), in their analysis of Londoners’ survey data, showed that people’s lack of a sense of obligation to obey the police explained their willingness to use violence to settle disputes. Nivette’s (2016) analysis of survey data from 18 Latin American countries showed that perceived police criminality and institutional ineffectiveness were related to support for vigilante violence. Further, Anderson (1999) found that ineffective state intervention was related to approval of vigilantism in an ethnographic study of deprived inner-city neighborhoods in the US. Goldstein (2003) in his ethnographic study in Bolivia, explored how police bribery was a likely cause of public mistrust in the police, which consequently made individuals more prone to have recourse to public lynching. Finally, in Nigeria, police lack of responsiveness to violent robberies encouraged the vigilante Bakassi Boys to engage in self-help crime control (Harnischfeger, 2003; Smith, 2004). Given the ample evidence produced by earlier work we conclude that when people perceive the legal institutions corrupt, ineffective and procedurally unjust, they are more likely to consider vigilante violence as a possible line of action. While prevailing research tends to treat legal legitimacy as more or less fixed, it should be noted that perceptions of legitimacy can change during the course of an event. Thus Stott et al. (2016) show that, after the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham, the situational illegitimacy of the police increased the protesters’ likelihood to engage in violent riots. Finally, most of the studies we reviewed above analyze attitudes towards vigilante violence, which is different than actual violent behavior.

The second condition that affects the likelihood for righteous anger to turn into vigilante violence is related to people’s experience with violence. Here, we assume that, if people live in a social environment in which they are exposed to the use of violence as an appropriate way of managing conflicts or disciplining subordinates (such as children), they are probably also more likely to resort to violence to punish offenders against moral imperatives. This is because violent behavior is in part socially learned behavior (Steenkamp, 2005). Prior work suggests that vigilante violence appears more often in societies with higher rates of violence. This seems true for regions such as the southern states of the US (Brundage, 1993; Whitfield, 1991; Wright, 1996), in African countries such as South Africa, Nigeria and, Tanzania (Abrahams, 1987; Baker, 2002; Buur and Jensen, 2004; Harnischfeger, 2003; Smith, 2004), in Latin American countries, for example Bolivia and Brazil (Benevides and Ferreira, 1991; Goldstein, 2003; Nivette, 2016), in Southeast Asian countries, for example Indonesia (Colombijn, 2002, 2018; Kloos, 2014; Welsh, 2008), and in South Asian countries, for example India and Pakistan (Berenschot, 2011; Tankebe and Asif, 2016).

The third socio-legal condition is the degree to which authorities encourage the use of violence against perceived offenders, which may make civilians feel fearless and unaccountable, rendering vigilante violence as an appropriate line of action more likely. In this way, authorities not only provide cover to vigilantes but also justify and legitimize their acts of violence. For instance, there is historical evidence that ministers and police actively facilitated lynchings in the south of the US (for example, for detail see Whitfield, 1991). In Georgia, from 1900 to 1914, the authorities handed over 63 percent of the offenders to the victims for revenge (Brundage, 1993). Authorities even attended the lynching as onlookers (Raper, 1933; Wright, 1996). However, the support and encouragement of authorities is not just a matter of the past. There are contemporary instances of authorities neglecting to prosecute vigilantes, and even forms of active encouragement to engage in vigilante violence (see, for recent examples in India, Berenschot, 2011; Biswas, 2017; Taseer, 2017; in Indonesia, Colombijn, 2002). In some countries, such as Indonesia, legal codes included clauses that allowed the killing of thieves under certain conditions (De Gelder, 1886; Louwes, 1921, cited in Colombijn, 2002: 317). An Indonesian criminologist noted that ‘[The Soeharto government] taught us that the only way to solve problems is with violence. It is difficult to undo this’ (Aditjondro, 2001, cited in Colombijn, 2018: 60). Welsh (2008) concluded that mob vigilante violence takes place either when authorities legitimize the violence, or when they are unable to take any action against vigilantes, or when they themselves mobilize vigilante groups.

These three conditions – legal legitimacy, people’s experience with violence, and authorities’ encouragement – are shaped by long-term and wider-scale social processes. To understand this, we introduce Elias’s ([1939] 2000) theory of the civilizing process. Elias uses the notion of the civilizing process as an analytical term to capture how the interrelated developments of state formation and widening chains of interdependencies force individuals to control their impulses in more encompassing and differentiated ways. State formation primarily entails the monopolization of violence at the political and administrative centers of expanding territories. As a result of this development, political struggles between local leaders moved to the center and became increasingly regulated; rather than the use of physical force, diplomacy, courtesy, and political savvy at the court became the dominant means to settle political conflicts. Over a long period of time, the social constraints that inhibit the spontaneous acting upon violent impulses tended to become internalized. Self-restraint, mainly in the form of (the fear) of shame that became connected to uncontrolled, impulsive behavior, gained more importance and spread across society as a marker of distinction. This development was reinforced by extending networks of interdependencies in vast pacified territories: people were now increasingly forced to control their impulses because their actions had greater impact on an increasing number of other people, which they needed to take into account.

Following Elias, unfolding civilizing processes reduce the likelihood of vigilante violence. First of all, the theory predicts that people would be more inclined to control their anger and repress violent impulses when they are confronted with violations of moral imperatives. Relatedly, their repugnance considering violence facilitates their acceptance of the execution of physical force by state authorities. Second, the concentration of the legitimate means to use violence in the hands of the central state not only increases the effectiveness of police and legal authorities, which in turn yields greater legal legitimacy, but also renders civil society more peaceful, so that violence becomes less common as a means to settle conflicts between civilians. Also, and perhaps most importantly, the monopolization of violence by the central state reduces authorities’ support for vigilante self-help because this undermines their power to handle internal social conflicts. In fact, authorities’ support of vigilante self-help probably indicates fragmentation rather than consolidation at the political center.

We can now integrate the various socio-legal conditions with our micro-sociological understanding of how violations of moral imperatives are conducive to violent action through vigilante rituals. Our conceptual argument is summarized in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Conceptual model of the theory.

Ultimately, our theoretical contribution aims to guide empirical research. Let us therefore derive a series of research questions from the theory. A first set of questions can be asked about the micro-sociology of vigilante rituals. For instance: What kind of violations of moral imperatives arouse righteous anger and fear in the members of a moral community? How do moral imperatives develop through the generations? How do vigilante rituals develop over time? What forms do vigilante rituals take and are these forms related to the type of moral imperative at stake? What are the conditions under which vigilante rituals do not produce the degree of bodily alignment required for vigilante violence to occur? And to what extent are differences in the form of vigilante rituals related to the type and severity of the violent action? On the other hand, it can be asked how and under what conditions participants intervene in the course of the ritual. Furthermore, what are the relationships between the time sequence of a series of vigilante rituals, the number of participants involved, the coordination of bodily alignment, and the type and severity of violent punishment? Another set of questions is related to how status and relational distances are activated in vigilante rituals: What is the relationship between the form and severity of vigilante rituals on the one hand and the relational and status distance between the offenders of moral imperatives and the perpetrators of vigilante violence on the other? A third set of questions zooms out and considers socio-legal conditions: In what ways do participants use forms of violence that are culturally specific (for example, the practice of vigilante kneecapping in Northern Ireland or that of ‘necklacing’ in parts of Africa, in which a burning car tire is hung around the neck of alleged robbers)? To what extent are ‘violence experts’ involved in vigilante rituals? And under which conditions, how and to what extent are vigilante rituals arranged by political or other ideological entrepreneurs to show their power to mobilize a crowd?

In addition to these research questions, the following series of hypotheses can be formulated:

H1. The likelihood for people to engage in vigilante violence increases when perceived violations of moral imperatives arouse righteous anger and fear in them.

H2. The likelihood for vigilante violence increases when righteous anger and fear, aroused by perceived violations of moral imperatives, are mobilized and channeled through vigilante rituals.

H3. The likelihood for people to transform these emotions into violence through vigilante rituals increases when legal legitimacy is low.

H4. The likelihood for people to transform these emotions into violence through vigilante rituals increases when authorities encourage vigilante action.

H5. The likelihood for people to transform these emotions into violence through vigilante rituals increases when they live in a social environment in which actors are exposed to violence as an appropriate way of managing conflicts or disciplining subordinates.

H6. The likelihood for people to transform these emotions into violence through vigilante rituals increases when the relational and social status distance between the alleged offenders and the victims is higher.

Similar hypotheses can be formulated about the attitudes of people towards vigilante violence:

H7. Feelings of righteous anger and fear aroused by perceived violations of moral imperatives are positively associated with support for vigilante violence.

H8. Low legal legitimacy is positively associated with the support for vigilante violence.

H9. People’s exposure to violence is positively associated with the support for vigilante violence.

H10. Authorities’ encouragement of vigilante self-help is positively associated with the support for vigilante violence.

H11. The social status and relational distance between the alleged offender against a moral imperative and the victim are positively associated with the support for vigilante violence.

Conclusion and discussion

Vigilante rituals theory, as we call it, outlines how culture can bring about violent vigilante action under varying social-legal conditions. In our view, it offers a more advanced conceptualization of the relationship between culture and violence and provides a more comprehensive understanding than the one-dimensional explanations that have been predominant in previous research. Also, the theory appreciates that vigilante violence is mostly a collective effort, whereas the prevailing approach is to focus on individuals’ attitudes towards the phenomenon. Earlier studies that did take the collective nature of vigilante violence into account focused on the notion of partisanship primarily, if not exclusively. Furthermore, vigilante rituals theory directs researchers’ attention to the micro-sociological processes at play, in which emotions, notably fear and anger, are transformed into violent vigilante action that restores the integrity of the moral imperative and the unity of the group. So far, the question as to how culture or attitudes translate into vigilante violent action has not been taken up in earlier work.

A final note about how vigilante rituals theory speaks to policies that aim to reduce vigilante violence. It is hard to influence socio-legal conditions and even harder to change processes of state formation, because such large-scale developments mostly unfold in unintended and unplanned ways. It is also hard to change the ways in which people perceive moral imperatives without changing the broader social conditions. Interventions are probably most effective when they focus on the specific situations in which culture becomes a line of action. In our theory, this happens when people are mobilized to channel their anger and fear into focused retaliatory desire. It is our hope that vigilante rituals theory encourages scholars to conduct empirical research into the situational dynamics of these dangerous moments in connection to investigating the socio-legal conditions that shape these moments. Any research attempt that contributes to reduce the harm that is inflicted by vigilante violence across the world is worth it.

References

Abrahams R (1987) Sungusungu: Village vigilante groups in Tanzania. African Affairs 86(343): 179–196.

Abrahams R (1998) Vigilant Citizens: Vigilantism and the State. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Abrahams R (2003) What’s in a name? Some thoughts on the vocabulary of vigilantism and related forms of informal criminal justice. In: Feenan D (ed.) Informal Criminal Justice. London: Ashgate, 25– 40.

Adinkrah M (2005) Vigilante homicides in contemporary Ghana. Journal of Criminal Justice 33(5): 413–427.

Anderson E (1999) Code of the Street: Decency, Violence, and the Moral Life of the Inner City. New York: Norton.

Baker B (2002) When the Bakassi Boys came: Eastern Nigeria confronts vigilantism. Journal of Contemporary African Studies 20(2): 223–244.

Benevides MV and Ferreira RMF (1991) Popular responses and urban violence: Lynching in Brazil. In: Huggins MK (ed.) Vigilantism and the State in Modern Latin America. New York: Praeger.

Berenschot W (2011) On the usefulness of Goondas in Indian politics: ‘Moneypower’ and ‘Musclepower’ in a Gujarati locality. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies 34(2): 255–275.

Biswas S (2017) Is India descending into mob rule? BBC News, 26 June. URL (accessed 23 October 2019): http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-40402021.

Black D (1983) Crime as social control. American Sociological Review 48(1): 34–45.

Black D (1998) The Social Structure of Right and Wrong. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Bottoms A and Tankebe J (2012) Beyond procedural justice: A dialogic approach to legitimacy in criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 102(1): 119–170.

Broomfield M (2016) The problems facing the new breed of vigilante pedophile hunters. Vice, 19 May. URL (accessed 23 October 2019): https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/xdmzk3/paedophile-vigilante-dangers-murder-uk.

Brown RM (1975) Strain of Violence: Historical Studies of American Violence and Vigilantism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Brundage WF (1993) Lynching in the New South: Georgia and Virginia, 1880–1930. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Brundage WF (1997) Under sentence of death: Lynching in the South. In: Senechal de la Roche R (ed.) The Sociogenesis of Lynching. Chapel Hill, NC, and London: University of North Carolina Press, 48–76.

Buckser AS (1992) Lynching as ritual in the American south. Berkeley Journal of Sociology 37: 11–28.

Buur L and Jensen S (2004) Introduction: Vigilantism and the policing of everyday life in South Africa. African Studies 63(2): 139–152.

Clarke JW (1998) Without fear or shame: Lynching, capital punishment and the subculture of violence in the American South. British Journal of Political Science 28(2): 269–289.

Collins R (2004) Interaction Ritual Chains. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Colombijn F (2002) Maling, maling! The lynching of petty criminals. In: Colombijn F and Lindblad JT (eds) Roots of Violence in Indonesia: Contemporary Violence in Historical Perspective. Leiden: KITLV Press, 299–329.

Colombijn F (2018) The production of urban space by violence and its aftermath in Jakarta and Kota Ambon, Indonesia. Ethnos 83(1): 58–79.

Crisp R (ed.) (2013) The Oxford Handbook of the History of Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Critcher C (2002) Media, government, and moral panic: The politics of pedophilia in Britain 2000–1. Journalism Studies 3(4): 521–35.

De Waal F (2009) Primates and Philosophers. How Morality Evolved. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Durkheim E([1893] 1997) The Division of Labor in Society. New York: Free Press.

Durkheim E ([1912] 1995) The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. Trans. Fields KE. New York: The Free Press.

Elias N (2000) The Civilizing Process: Sociogenetic and Psychogenetic Investigations. London: Wiley Blackwell. First published in German, 1939.

Ellison CG (1991) An eye for an eye? A note on the southern subculture of violence thesis. Social Forces 69(4): 1223–1239.

Ellison CG, Burr JA and McCall PL (2003) The enduring puzzle of southern homicide: Is regional religious culture the missing piece? Homicide Studies 7(4): 326–352.

Fischer D (1989) Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fiske AP and Rai TS (2015) Virtuous Violence: Hurting and Killing to Create, Sustain, End, and Honor Social Relationships. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Frijda NH (1987) Emotion, cognitive structure, and action tendency. Cognition and Emotion 1(2): 115–143.

Garland D (2005) Penal excess and surplus meaning: Public torture lynching in twentieth century America. Law and Society Review 39: 793–834.

Goldstein DM (2003) ‘In our own hands’: Lynching, justice and the law in Bolivia. American Ethnologist 30: 22–43.

Gould R (1999) Collective violence and group solidarity: Evidence from a feuding society. American Sociological Review 64(3): 356–380.

Gould R (2000) Revenge as sanction and solidarity display: An analysis of vendettas in nineteenth-century Corsica. American Sociological Review 65(5): 682–704.

Haas N, de Keijser JW and Bruinsma GW (2014) Public support for vigilantism, confidence in police and police responsiveness. Policing and Society: An International Journal of Research and Policy 24(2): 224–241.

Haidt J (2012) The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. New York: Pantheon Books

Handy J (2004) Chicken thieves, witches, and judges: Vigilante justice and customary law in Guatemala. Journal of Latin American Studies 36(3): 533–561.

Harnischfeger J (2003) The Bakassi Boys: Fighting crime in Nigeria. Journal of Modern African Studies 41(1): 23–49.

Hill KK (2010) Black vigilantism: The rise and decline of African American lynch mob activity in the Mississippi and Arkansas deltas, 1883–1923. Journal of African American History 95(1): 26–43.

Jackson J, Asif M, Bradford B et al. (2014) Corruption and police legitimacy in Lahore, Pakistan. British Journal of Criminology 54(6): 1067–1088.

Jackson J, Huq A, Bradford B et al. (2013) Monopolizing force? Police legitimacy and public attitudes toward the acceptability of violence. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 19: 479–497.

Johnston L (1996) What is vigilantism? British Journal of Criminology 36(2): 220–236.

Karmen A (2016) Crime Victims: An Introduction to Victimology. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning Katz J (1988) Seductions of Crime. Moral and Sensual Attractions in Doing Evil. New York: Basic Books.

Kil SH, Menjívar C and Doty RL (2009) Securing borders: Patriotism, vigilantism and the brutalization of the US American public. In: McDonald WF (ed.) Immigration, Crime and Justice.

Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 297–312.

Kloos D (2014) In the name of Syariah? Vigilante violence, territoriality, and moral authority in Aceh, Indonesia. Indonesia 98(1): 59–90.

Krishnan M (2017) The rise of creep catchers, Canada’s vigilante pedophile hunters. Vice, 5 January. URL (accessed 23 October 2019): https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/mgvywn/the-real-story-behind-the-rise-of-creep-catchers-canadas-vigilante-pedophile-hunters.

Kühn S, Müller BC, van der Leij A et al. (2010) Neural correlates of emotional synchrony. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 6(3): 368–374.

Lee MR (2006) The religious institutional base and violent crime in rural areas. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 45: 309–324.

Lee MR and Ousey GC (2011) Reconsidering the culture and violence connection: Strategies of action in the rural south. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 26(5): 899–929.

Lee MR, Bankston WB, Hayes TC et al. (2007) Revisiting the southern culture of violence. Sociological Quarterly 48: 253–275.

Nisbett RE and Cohen D (1996) Culture of Honor: The Psychology of Violence in the South. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Nivette AE (2016) Institutional ineffectiveness, illegitimacy, and public support for vigilantism in Latin America. Criminology 54: 142–175.

Páez D, Rimé B, Basabe N et al. (2015) Psychosocial effects of perceived emotional synchrony in collective gatherings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 108(5): 711.

Patterson O (1999) Rituals of blood: Sacrificial murders in the postbellum South. Journal of Blacks in Higher Education 23: 123–127.

Petrunik M (2003) The hare and the tortoise: Dangerousness and sex offender policy in the United States and Canada. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 45(1): 43–72.

Pratten D and Sen A (2007) Global Vigilantes: Perspectives on Justice and Violence. London: C Hurst & Co Publishers Ltd.

Raper AF (1933) The Tragedy of Lynching. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

Rosenbaum HJ and Sederberg PC (1974) Vigilantism: An analysis of establishment violence. Comparative Politics 6(4): 541–570.

Sederberg PC (1978) The phenomenology of vigilantism in contemporary America: An interpretation. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 1(3–4): 287–305.

Senechal de la Roche R (1996) Collective violence as social control. Sociological Forum 11: 97–128.

Senechal de la Roche R (2001) Why is collective violence collective? Sociological Theory 19(2): 126–144.

Silke A (2001) Dealing with vigilantism: Issues and lessons for the police. The Police Journal 74(2): 120–133.

Simon J (2000) Megan’s Law: Crime and democracy in late modern America. Law and Social Inquiry 25(4): 1111–1150.

Smith DJ (2004) The Bakassi Boys: Vigilantism, violence, and political imagination in Nigeria. Cultural Anthropology 19(3): 429–455.

Sowell T (2005) Black Rednecks and White Liberals. San Francisco, CA: Encounter Books.

Steenkamp C (2005) The legacy of war: Conceptualizing a ‘culture of violence’ to explain violence after peace accords. The Round Table 94(379): 253–267.

Stott C, Drury J and Reicher S (2016) On the role of a social identity analysis in articulating structure and collective action: The 2011 riots in Tottenham and Hackney. British Journal of Criminology 57(4): 964–981.

Sunshine J and Tyler TR (2003) The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law and Society Review 37: 555–589.

Swidler A (1986) Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review 51(2): 273–286.

Tajfel H (1981) Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology. Cambridge University Press Archive.

Tankebe J (2009) Self-help, policing, and procedural justice: Ghanaian vigilantism and the rule of law. Law and Society Review 43: 245–268.

Tankebe J and Asif M (2016) Police legitimacy and support for vigilante violence in Pakistan. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice 40(4): 295–314.

Taseer A (2017) Anatomy of a lynching. The New York Times, 16 April. URL (accessed 23 October 2019): https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/16/opinion/anatomy-of-a-lynching.html.

Tavory I (2011) The question of moral action: A formalist position. Sociological Theory 29(4): 272–93.

Tilly C (2003) The Politics of Collective Violence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tucker W (1985) Vigilante: The Backlash Against Crime in America. New York: Stein and Day.

Tyler TR (1990) Why People Obey the Law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Tyler TR and Huo YJ (2002) Trust in the Law: Encouraging Public Cooperation with the Police and Courts. New York: Russell-Sage Foundation.

Vaisey S (2008) Socrates, Skinner, and Aristotle: Three ways of thinking about culture in action. Sociological Forum 23(3): 603–613.

Vaisey S (2009) Motivation and justification: A dual-process model of culture in action. American Journal of Sociology 114(6): 1675–1715.

Weisburd D (1988) Vigilantism as community social control: Developing a quantitative criminological model. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 4: 137–153.

Welsh B (2008) Local and national: Kerovokan mobbing in Indonesia. Journal of East Asian Studies 8(3): 473–504.

Whitfield SJ (1991) A Death in the Delta: The Story of Emmett Till. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Wright GC (1996) Racial Violence in Kentucky, 1865–1940: Lynching, Mob Rule, and ‘Legal Lynching.’ Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press.

Young H (2005) The black body as souvenir in American lynching. Theatre Journal 57(4): 639–657.

#vigilantism #vigilante violence #violence #culture #vigilante rituals #crime and punishment #moral imperatives #extrajudicial violence #legal legitimacy #mob rule #community justice #sociology #collective violence #emile durkheim #sacred values

[azcrimlaw]

Eliminating Your DUI Record in Arizona

Many people who are convicted for driving under the influence want to know exactly when their record may be eligible for setting aside the conviction after all conditions of punishment are satisfied. The set aside is Arizona’s version of an expungement. A criminal history in general can be a real ongoing problem for those convicted, and especially when the charge is for impaired driving. This can be a factor in obtaining employment and even eligibility for government services or housing when there is a drug charge connected to the DUI record. Receiving a DUI citation is a watershed moment in the life of many and expunging the record can be of great importance for those turning over a new leaf in life. Luckily in Arizona, there is a path to cleaning up the record of your conviction after filing a petition to set aside.

Preparatory Steps

The first element of requesting a set aside in Arizona is assembling all records associated with the case and proving all penalties have been satisfied as ordered by the court. This includes any probationary period that was ordered following the charge or parole in the event of significant jail time. The seriousness of the charge can have an impact on a judicial decision. The court is not required by law to approve setting the record aside, which is what happens in Arizona. Many states seal the record from public view, but Arizona actually dismisses the case after the convicted defendant presents an organized request for dismissal based on their personal rehabilitation. It is vital to be prepared if you want to make a successful set aside request. For your DUI Arizona set aside, you will typically need records proving:

Paid fees and fines

Completed probation or parole periods

Jail sentence completion

Completing mandatory alcohol and / or drug education classes

Completing interlock ignition device order periods

Supporting Testimony

Another component of a set aside in Arizona is the allowance of personal testimony from people within the local community supporting the claim of rehabilitation. This can include anyone from police officers to clergymen or city council members, or practically any other member of the community who can attest to a new direction in life for the petitioner. The purpose of the set aside in Arizona is based on the concept of a fresh start, but the court maintains that a fresh start must be earned beyond completing the required conditions of punishment. Having an experienced Arizona set aside attorney preparing your request means you have a legal professional representing the case who understands what the court will accept as proof of rehabilitation.

Importance of a Waiting Period

There is no statutory waiting period for set aside eligibility in Arizona, unlike many other states. Sealing a record is generally routine in some states, as each conviction is assessed individually. Subsequent personal criminal activity does not necessarily affect the sealing of some records in other states. This is not the situation in Arizona. However, a reasonable amount should pass from the completion of the sentence to show you have been rehabilitated.. Any run-ins with law enforcement from the date of offense till the filing of the set aside, can have a major negative impact for those striving for a DUI set aside. A successful set aside for an adult will “release” the individual for “all penalties and disabilities resulting from the conviction.” While it is not absolutely necessary to have an Arizona DUI lawyer preparing and representing a set aside, it is by far the most effective method for a successful petition. There are specific details that must be provided when the request is filed, and the court is not obligated to even grant a hearing when certain legalities prohibit the ruling. The attorney you choose can be the ultimate difference between an approved setting aside of the record and a court denial. Anyone who is seeking an Arizona DUI conviction to be set aside should contact the law office of Robert A. Dodell, Attorney at Law, in Scottsdale for more information.

Eliminating Your DUI Record in Arizona was originally seen on website for AZ Crim Law – azcrimlaw.com Robert A. Dodell, Attorney at Law

10601 N Hayden Rd, #I-103

Scottsdale, AZ 85260

[phone]

httpss://goo.gl/maps/diwY4pu8X5m

[teeky185]

The following is the text of the letter United States Attorney General William Barr sent to Congress on Sunday summarising a report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller on his investigation into Russia's role in the 2016 presidential election:   Dear Chairman Graham, Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member Feinstein, and Ranking Member Collins: As a supplement to the notification provided on Friday, march 22, 2019, I am writing today to advise you of the principal conclusions reached by Special Counsel Robert Mueller III and to inform you about the status of my initial review of the report he has prepared. The Special Counsel's Report On Friday, the Special Counsel submitted to me a "confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions" he has reached, as required by 28 C.F.R. § 600.8(c). This report is entitled "Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election." Although my review is ongoing, I believe that it is in the public interest to describe the report and to summarize the principal conclusions reached by the Special Counsel and the results of his investigation. William Barr, U.S. attorney general, leaves his home in McLean, Virginia Credit: Bloomberg The report explains that the Special Counsel and his staff thoroughly investigated allegations that members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump, and others associated with it, conspired with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, or sought to obstruct the related federal investigations. In the report, the Special Counsel noted that, in completing his investigation, he employed 19 lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants, and other professional staff. The Special Counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses. The Special Counsel obtained a number of indictments and convictions of individuals and entities in connection with his investigation, all of which have been publicly disclosed. During the course of his investigation, the Special Counsel also referred several matters to other offices for further action. The report does not recommend any further indictments, nor did the Special Counsel obtain any sealed indictments that have yet to be made public. Below, I summarize the principal conclusions set out in the Special Counsel's report. Russian Interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. The Special Counsel's report is divided into two parts. The first describes the results of the Special Counsel's investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The report outlines the Russian effort to influence the election and documents crimes committed by persons associated with the Russian government in connection with those efforts. The report further explains that a primary consideration for the Special Counsel's investigation was whether any Americans -including individuals associated with the Trump campaign - joined the Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would be a federal crime. The Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities." Special Counsel Robert Mueller walks after attending church in Washington, DC.  Credit: Getty The Special Counsel's investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election. As noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities. The second element involved the Russian government's efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election. But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple. offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign. Obstruction of Justice The report's second part addresses a number of actions by the President - most of which have been the subject of public reporting - that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a "thorough factual investigation" into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other - as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as "difficult issues" of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction .. The Special Counsel states that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." The Special Counsel's decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel's office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel's obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president. In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that "the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference," and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President's intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding. In cataloguing the President's actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department's principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of­justice offense. Status of the Department's Review The relevant regulations contemplate that the Special Counsel's report will be a "confidential report" to the Attorney General. See Office of Special Counsel, 64 Fed. Reg. 37,038, 37,040-41 (July 9, 1999). As I have previously stated, however, I am mindful of the public interest in this matter. For that reason, my goal and intent is to release as much of the Special Counsel's report as I can consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies. Based on my discussions with the Special Counsel and my initial review, it is apparent that the report contains material that is or could be subject to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6( e ), which imposes restrictions on the use and disclosure of information relating to "matter[ s] occurring before grand jury." Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(2)(B). Rule 6(e) generally limits disclosure of certain grand jury information in a criminal investigation and prosecution. Id. Disclosure of 6( e) material beyond the strict limits set forth in the rule is a crime in certain circumstances. See, e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 401(3). This restriction protects the integrity of grand jury proceedings and ensures that the unique and invaluable investigative powers of a grand jury are used strictly for their intended criminal justice function. At a glance | Who has been charged by the Russia investigation Given these restrictions, the schedule for processing the report depends in part on how quickly the Department can identify the 6( e) material that by law cannot be made public. I have requested the assistance of the Special Counsel in identifying all 6( e) information contained in the report as quickly as possible. Separately, I also must identify any information that could impact other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other offices. As soon as that process is complete, I will be in a position to move forward expeditiously in determining what can be released in light of applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.   As I observed in my initial notification, the Special Counsel regulations provide that "the Attorney General may determine that public release of' notifications to your respective Committees "would be in the public interest." 28 C.F.R. § 600.9(c). I have so determined, and I will disclose this letter to the public after delivering it to you. Sincerely, William P. Barr Attorney General

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2HRJyj4

#latest news #Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines

[duaneodavila]

Crim Law Reform, Two Approaches

The need isn’t new or novel, as its been the focus of efforts for more than four decades. That’s not me saying so, but Justice Mark Dwyer in the opening words of the final report of the NYSBA Task Force on Criminal Discovery, dated December 1, 2014.

For forty years, reports and legislative proposals by experts and practitioners have urged New York State to reform its outdated and unfair criminal discovery rules. This Task Force seeks to break the logjams that have stalled these necessary changes.

Discovery is but one of the major reforms needed and on the table, as New York has historically had a Democratic-majority Assembly and Republican-majority Senate. As the Dems now hold both chambers, and Gov. Andy Cuomo appears to be on board, the possibility now exists.

But what’s to be done, and how to make it happen, remains a problem. As usual, the District Attorney Association is fighting changes which will make their ability to coerce pleas and convict more difficult. Reform will place new burdens on their performance of the function, requiring them to actually perform their job, which will involve the additional labor of gathering discovery materials, copying them and turning them over to the defense. Nobody likes doing more work.

Details of reform remain problematic, as varying levels of complexity in the proposals raise the question of whether reform will create a new Rube Goldberg machine, with too many moving parts, too many rules and exceptions, that it will prove too difficult and unrealistic to manage.

Unspoken is that at the same time as reforms are being proposed, so too are new crimes and higher sentences for “domestic” violence and sex offenses, and conditions relating to racially disproportionate outcomes in such matters as bail reform, where the proposed law would prohibit algorithms for release that produce disparate results based on race, since the proposal presumes no non-racist algorithm could do such a thing.

But the hard work of crafting viable reforms that will work in the real world, that will make the system fulfill its purpose, isn’t the sort of problem that most reformers either grasp or care about. The syllogism kicks in, as usual, and if the reforms are untenable or fail to serve their function, we can revisit them 40 years from now. Something must be done.

Whether this is the right “something” is beyond the interest of most people. And sadly, the organized reform and public defender groups are so deeply captives of progressive ideology that they’re at the forefront of irrational and presumptive beliefs that are likely to doom serious solutions. Contrast these two positions in the Albany Times-Union, both in favor of reform, but very different in approach.

Kings County District Attorney Eric Gonzalez wrote in support:

Currently, prosecutors can wait until a jury is selected and the trial is about to begin to turn over discovery material to the defense. This makes it extremely difficult for a person accused of a crime, or their lawyer, to prepare and present an adequate defense at their trial.

While constitutionally permissible, I believe this is unfair. Not only does the current law allow “trial by ambush,” it prevents a person accused of a crime from learning the nature and strength of the case against them in order to make a knowing plea of guilty should they choose to forego a trial.

But what of the claims by DAASNY that this will put the system at risk?

This is not how we do things in Brooklyn. The Brooklyn District Attorney’s Office has for many years gone beyond what the law requires, turning over discovery material at the very beginning of a case, and continuing to turn over additional information as we obtain it from the police, the medical examiner and other sources.

* **

Our “open file discovery” practice has not resulted in the negative outcomes some reform opponents fear. The safety of victims and witnesses is not compromised by our practice and they are not discouraged from coming forward. Do we lose more of our cases because we don’t use secrecy as a tactical advantage? I honestly don’t think so, but that is beside the point. Gamesmanship should have no place in how we, as prosecutors, do our jobs.

The “Blindfold Law” is a recent marketing phrase invented by reform advocates, who have mounted a social media campaign largely characterized by misleading and exaggerated claims about the problem. It serves well to work up the passion of the ignorant, but it’s dishonest, likely deliberately so. But when dedication to a cause excuses such details as honesty, they have no qualms about it. And it remains unquestionable that reform is critically needed.

In contrast, consider this letter from the an advocacy group, VOCAL-NY:

I am sickened by David Soares’ position that money bail is essential to prosecutors because it gives them the power to force people to make life-altering decisions under the duress of a threatened county jail stay (“Soares, DAs not in love with budget,” Feb. 4).

This attitude is exactly how prosecutorial power has been abused for decades, resulting in the exponential growth of jail and prison populations reflected in what we now call mass incarceration. It is also illegal under the current New York state bail statute. It’s time for New York state legislators to look past the dog-whistle fear-mongering of district attorneys worried about losing their power to railroad defendants. Enough is enough.

The frustration that oozes from this letter is understandable, and it’s not necessarily wrong. The DAASNY is playing dirty to kill reform, so advocates are giving it back to them. But if we’re to get reform, as is possible now when it hasn’t been before, and we’re likely to live with the consequences for the next four decades or so, doing it right so that we actually fix real problems rather than promote a fantasy agenda matters.

Expressions of outraged emotions combined with distortions of the problems and fantasy ideological solutions will not solve the problems. More to the point, letters like this will drive away the legislators who know that the moment’s reform trends will pass, some heinous crime will happen that outrages their constituents, and there will be cries for a new round of tough on crime. “Something must be done” is the rallying cry of both sides.

If something is going to be done, let’s try to get it right this time, and social media-depth rants of emotion only drive legislators away. If this is going to be the one chance to make reform happen, then let’s not blow it on feelings of outrage and instead do the heavy lifting of crafting reforms that will actually work and provide due process for all.

Crim Law Reform, Two Approaches republished via Simple Justice

[legalseat]

Obscenity, Indecency, Sex Dolls and Freedom

Obscenity and Indecency related offences continue to be regulated under the Criminal Code of Canada. The adjudication of the obscene and indecent is well-mined terrain in the Canadian jurisprudence. Whether it be the regulation of erotic dance and strip clubs,swinger's clubsor pornography, the material at issue needed to be assessed at to whether it is harmful - a matter often obscured by moral calculi. Child pornographycontinues to be a regular fixation of the courts, and the harms inherent in such cases often inculcate the staid weighing of procedural adjudications.

These matters take on new meaning in the context of new technology. Whether it be virtual reality, or interactive sex dolls/robots, the laws of obscenity and indecency continue to be tested. The case of R v Harrisson, in Newfoundland, raises issues of child pornography squarely in this context.

The accused ordered a childlike sex doll for personal use from a Japanese manufacturer. The Canada Border Services Agency intercepted it, and Harrisson was charged with possessing child pornography and mailing obscene matter, as well as two charges under the federal Customs Act of smuggling and possession of prohibited goods.

CBC news reported that:

"Dr. Peter Collins testified in provincial court Tuesday in St. John’s that the doll is the size of a prepubescent child without sexually mature characteristics...

Canada’s Criminal Code says child pornography includes “a photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means” that shows explicit sexual activity involving anyone who is, or is depicted as being, under the age of 18.

Such materials are also child porn if they primarily depict, for a sexual purpose, a sexual organ or anal region of anyone under 18.

Collins testified as an expert witness who is frequently consulted by police on such cases. He also quoted research by Michael Seto, a Canadian forensic psychologist who focuses on pedophilia.

Collins said some pedophiles can become “incited” by imagery, such as sex dolls, while others may be satiated or satisfied before committing actual crimes. Outcomes differ according to many factors including stress, Collins testified."

The case has reignited old debates about harm in a new context. One viewpoint continues to be that such laws, and the application of such laws to accused persons like Harrisson, unduly troubles the right to freedom of expression of Canadians.

unabashedly argues for complete freedom in the context of obscenity and indecency law. Julie Yan argues that the laws restrict "artistic freedom by requiring an unsubstantiated risk of harm" (Yan 2017, 363). Consequently, she "takes an anti- censorship feminist approach arguing there is profound educational value to be had in allowing artists to depict morally taboo subject matter. " She "offers a policy recommendation to eliminate the law of obscenity and indecency" (Yan 2017, 363).

"Holding an anti-censorship view, I believe that sexual imagery should be liberated rather than repressed to allow for free expression. This is because “the right to freedom of expression rests on the conviction” that not only “‘good’ and popular expression [is protected], but also unpopular or even offensive expression”... As such, [I] argue that censorship, based on narrow viewpoints and unsubstantiated evidence limits the expression of ideas and silences the very voices that can raise awareness toward social change. While strides have been made to refine the law, law reform is not the answer because it compromises the principles for freedom of expression by stifling the development of new and challenging art forms. Moreover, law reform does not prevent artists from defending their work at considerable personal and financial costs. Consequently, this paper moves beyond alteration to suggest obscenity law be eliminated "

See the entirety of this week's featured paper Robson Crim Edition of the Manitoba Law Journal.

Obscenity, Indecency, Sex Dolls and Freedom published first on http://ift.tt/2vSFQ3P

[legalroll]

Obscenity, Indecency, Sex Dolls and Freedom

Obscenity and Indecency related offences continue to be regulated under the Criminal Code of Canada. The adjudication of the obscene and indecent is well-mined terrain in the Canadian jurisprudence. Whether it be the regulation of erotic dance and strip clubs,swinger's clubsor pornography, the material at issue needed to be assessed at to whether it is harmful - a matter often obscured by moral calculi. Child pornographycontinues to be a regular fixation of the courts, and the harms inherent in such cases often inculcate the staid weighing of procedural adjudications.

These matters take on new meaning in the context of new technology. Whether it be virtual reality, or interactive sex dolls/robots, the laws of obscenity and indecency continue to be tested. The case of R v Harrisson, in Newfoundland, raises issues of child pornography squarely in this context.

The accused ordered a childlike sex doll for personal use from a Japanese manufacturer. The Canada Border Services Agency intercepted it, and Harrisson was charged with possessing child pornography and mailing obscene matter, as well as two charges under the federal Customs Act of smuggling and possession of prohibited goods.

CBC news reported that:

"Dr. Peter Collins testified in provincial court Tuesday in St. John’s that the doll is the size of a prepubescent child without sexually mature characteristics...

Canada’s Criminal Code says child pornography includes “a photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means” that shows explicit sexual activity involving anyone who is, or is depicted as being, under the age of 18.

Such materials are also child porn if they primarily depict, for a sexual purpose, a sexual organ or anal region of anyone under 18.

Collins testified as an expert witness who is frequently consulted by police on such cases. He also quoted research by Michael Seto, a Canadian forensic psychologist who focuses on pedophilia.

Collins said some pedophiles can become “incited” by imagery, such as sex dolls, while others may be satiated or satisfied before committing actual crimes. Outcomes differ according to many factors including stress, Collins testified."

The case has reignited old debates about harm in a new context. One viewpoint continues to be that such laws, and the application of such laws to accused persons like Harrisson, unduly troubles the right to freedom of expression of Canadians.

unabashedly argues for complete freedom in the context of obscenity and indecency law. Julie Yan argues that the laws restrict "artistic freedom by requiring an unsubstantiated risk of harm" (Yan 2017, 363). Consequently, she "takes an anti- censorship feminist approach arguing there is profound educational value to be had in allowing artists to depict morally taboo subject matter. " She "offers a policy recommendation to eliminate the law of obscenity and indecency" (Yan 2017, 363).

"Holding an anti-censorship view, I believe that sexual imagery should be liberated rather than repressed to allow for free expression. This is because “the right to freedom of expression rests on the conviction” that not only “‘good’ and popular expression [is protected], but also unpopular or even offensive expression”... As such, [I] argue that censorship, based on narrow viewpoints and unsubstantiated evidence limits the expression of ideas and silences the very voices that can raise awareness toward social change. While strides have been made to refine the law, law reform is not the answer because it compromises the principles for freedom of expression by stifling the development of new and challenging art forms. Moreover, law reform does not prevent artists from defending their work at considerable personal and financial costs. Consequently, this paper moves beyond alteration to suggest obscenity law be eliminated "

See the entirety of this week's featured paper Robson Crim Edition of the Manitoba Law Journal.

Obscenity, Indecency, Sex Dolls and Freedom published first on http://ift.tt/2fPSFkQ

[fixerupperchic]

Hello Friends!  I hope you all  had a great week; I can tell you that things are looking ‘very up’ at my little Kilgore project!  The guys have officially moved inside to start the finishing (aka, they’re finally going to make it pretty!)  A little more about this later…..

but since the house is in a transitional stage, I thought I’d take a few moments to show off Kilgore itself, my soon-to-be new home!

  Some of you may know more about Kilgore than I do, but for those who know little or nothing, here are a few highlights;

“The World’s Richest Acre”

One cannot talk about Kilgore Texas without talking about oil!  Not only is it the heritage, and still the major industry in the area, but the evidence is PROMINENT!

So…if you’re from Texas, anywhere in Texas, chances are you pass pump-jacks daily…you may even live where there are wells operating noisily…you almost certainly ARE or know people who are oil-field workers….in one of the many industries related to and in support of the oil fields.   BUT IF YOU LIVE IN KILGORE, this scene is what you see everyday… DOWNTOWN!  It was…and it is, still today.

A little history from Wikipedia (I hate to copy/paste, but how could I say it better?! )

Kilgore was founded in 1872 when the International–Great Northern Railroad completed the initial phase of rail line between Palestine and Longview. The rail company chose to bypass New Danville, a small community about 10 miles (16 km) southeast of Longview, in lieu of a new townsite platted on 174 acres (0.70 km2) sold to the railroad by Constantine Buckley Kilgore, the town’s namesake. That way the railroad gained the profits from sale and development of these lands.

The new town received a post office in 1873 and, with a station and transportation for getting commodity crops to market, soon began to draw residents and businesses away from New Danville. By 1885, the population had reached 250, and the community had two cotton gins, a church, and its own school. The racially segregated Kilgore Independent School District was organized in 1910. By 1914 the town had two banks, several businesses, and a reported population of 700. The 1920s showed continued steady growth, and by 1929 Kilgore was home to an estimated 1,000 residents.

Prosperity came to a halt, however, when Kilgore was dealt severe blows by a steep decline in cotton prices (on which most of the town’s economy was still based), and the effects of the Great Depression. Businesses began to close and, by the middle of 1930, the population had fallen to 500; the community appeared destined to become a ghost town. Black people joined the Great Migration out of the South to northern, midwestern, and western cities for work.

Kilgore’s fortunes changed dramatically on October 3, 1930, when wildcatter Columbus M. “Dad” Joiner struck oil near the neighboring town of Henderson. This well, known as the Daisy Bradford #3, marked the discovery of the vast East Texas Oil Field. Seemingly overnight Kilgore was transformed from a small farming town on the decline into a bustling boomtown. The Daisy Bradford #3 was subsequently followed by the Lou Della Crim No. 1 and many others.[5] By 1936, the population had increased to more than 12,000, and Kilgore’s skyline was crowded with oil derricks.

Oil production continued at a breakneck pace throughout the early 1930s, with more than 1,100 producing oil wells within city limits at the height of the boom. The explosive growth left most civic services overwhelmed, and as a result Kilgore was forced to incorporate in 1931. With the city flooded with male workers and roustabouts, law enforcement struggled to keep order among the shanties, tents, and ramshackle honky-tonks that crowded Kilgore’s main streets. On one occasion, they had to summon help from the Texas Rangers to keep the peace.

By the mid-1930s the oil boom had begun to subside, and most of the small oil companies and wildcatters had sold out to major corporations. The boom was essentially over by 1940. But oil production has remained central to the city’s economy. The population, which fluctuated wildly throughout the 1930s, stabilized at around 10,000 in the 1950s. A 2015 estimate placed it at just under 15,000 residents.

If you want to know more, it’s well worth your time to visit the East Texas Oil Museum

  Back to those downtown derricks for a moment, I MAY be wrong, but I believe the old buildings shown here are the present-day home of Jack Ryan’s Steak & Chop House, one of Kilgore’s most wonderful restaurants, and one any town would be lucky to have!

I can’t mention Jack Ryan’s without a nod to The Back Porch, Kilgore’s casual venue for live music, libations, and dancing!

  The Kilgore Rangerettes!

I KNOW you’ve heard of the Rangerettes!  They’ve been performing all over the world since 1940; to be specific…The Rangerettes have performed on four continents, in eleven foreign countries, twenty-three states, and Washington D.C…have performed at 67 Cotton Bowl halftimes in a row, and regulary perform at Dallas Cowboy pregame and halftime shows.

You may have even heard of Gussie Nell Davis, the super-famous founder of the Rangerettes….here she is:

However, I MAY be able to clue you in on a lesser-known fact of the inventive Gussie Nell Davis’ accomplishments!  You see, I’m from Greenville Texas, home of The Flaming Flashes!  

In case you’re wondering what The Flaming Flashes have to do with the Kilgore Rangerettes, here you go:  Gussie Nell Davis was a PE teacher from  Farmersville, Texas (between Greenville and McKinney), who turned the Greenville Lions’ pep squad into a  drum & bugle corp famous for high kicks, precision routines & short skirts, and named them The Flaming Flashes!   My 2 oldest sisters were in the Flashes, and I can attest to the HIGH STANDARDS!  Back in the 60’s my oldest sister was temporarily benched upon threat of expulsion….for what? Well, for cutting her hair an inch too short!  The girls were regularly weighed in at that time, and were required to have hair of a particular length to flip up on their shoulders, looking perfect under the famous cowgirl hats!  Gussie Nell Davis had set super high standards, which were adhered to by her successor, Mary J Vance.   

But alas, in 1939 Kilgore College dean Dr Masters hired Gussie Nell away from Greenville High School; he wanted something new and unique that would increase female enrollment at the college, but also keep people in their seats during halftime, instead of drinking alcohol and brawling under the stadium!  Greenville’s loss was Kilgore’s gain…and the Rangerettes were born!

As a young Jr High and Sr High twirler in Greenville myself, I attended twirling camp in Kilgore each summer, where the name Gussie Nell Davis was in the air all the time! Her stringent standards were considered the ‘norm’ at Kilgore College, so they were just as hard on us!  (I thought the campus was SO cool; I loved twirling camp!)

And one more TODAY connection for me:  my good friend and client “Pill” Malm (formerly Barbara “Pill” Harmon) was one of Ms Davis’ assistants in the past!  She moved back to Kilgore a few years ago to help open the Rangerette Showcase and Museum, on the campus of Kilgore College, where she can be found many days behind the desk…and the showcase is absolutely fascinating!  If you haven’t visited, put it on your calendar; it’s a hidden gem!  

Texas Shakespeare Festival!

Talk about a local gem!  Started in 1986, it’s now in its 32nd season.  Need I say more?  Here’s the upcoming 2018 Season if you want to start getting excited now!

While I’m name-dropping, the Shakespeare Festival is held at Kilgore College’s Van Cliburn Auditorium….another son of Kilgore, Van Cliburn was one of Texas’ most famous classical musicians, who emerged as a prodigy when he amazingly won the Tchaikovsky International Competition in 1958, in Russia, at the age of 23!

(My Mom, as a classical pianist & later teacher herself, worshiped Van Cliburn!)

I cannot possibly do justice to his story as well as Prudence Mackintosh did, for Austin’s NPR station; I invite you to read her article here.

That’s just a few noteworthy things about Kilgore; if you want to know more, please follow the links in each section!  As far as I’m concerned, I like the small-town charm and the interesting, affordable homes that are still standing there.  I have sold many Kilgore homes to first-time buyers.  One Saturday morning when I was sitting in the house, contemplating purchasing it, I heard a melodic tune getting louder and louder, till I suddenly realized it was an ice-cream truck coming down the street!  That was a nice moment…

  Ok, just a couple of progress photos:

The termite-chewed area surrounding the front door has now been replaced with nice new wood and covered up with sheetrock

The new roof is being installed, and should be finished in a couple of days.  I used Weathered Wood, which has always been my favorite composition shingle; it’s a dark cool gray and brown mixture.  Of course it will look spectacular soon, when the bricks, shutters and doors are sporting THEIR new colors!

In the picture on the right, you can see a dark brick covering the spot where a window was removed to create the master  bath  (and one was removed in the kitchen as well).  We had to patch the hole with brick, and this is the only one  Roger could find that matched the size, shape and texture of our brick exactly.  If you could see it up close, you’d be impressed!  Now when the paint covers it all, you’d never know there was once a window in that spot!  Great work, guys!

This week I want to leave you with a different sort of “find”; this is not something I bought, but something I learned from my short respite, living in an apartment!

This is a SECURITY feature I plan to make use of in my urban cottage…and you may want to as well!  Notice the deadbolt on the outside of my door; you unlock it with a key and enter.  But look at the inside of the door; see the EXTRA deadbolt at the top?  Yep….that makes me feel pretty safe!  So Roger has Jan at Designer Accents in Longview on the hunt for this one-sided deadbolt (she is also supplying our barn door hardware!)

  Coming up at the Urban Cottage this week:

Sheetrock – woohoo!  We passed inspection and can now close up the walls!

Plumbing faucet rough-in valves

Hardibacker for bathroom tile; showers, tub, floor

Tile work in the master bath, later in the week

POSSIBLY setting the kitchen cabinets, later in the week

Tape, bed & texture begins

If I’m lucky, maybe I’ll see some color SOMEWHERE!

Thank you once again, my fixer-upper friends….have a wonderful week & check back in for really fun progress!  And remember… I’m never too busy for your referrals!

  Kilgore Texas is more than meets the eye....see if you knew all of these things! Hello Friends!  I hope you all  had a great week; I can tell you that things are looking 'very up' at my little Kilgore project! 

#urban cottage #East Texas Oil Museum #Greenville Flaming Flashes #Gussie Nell Davis #Jack Ryan&039;s Steak and Chop House #kilgore cottage #Kilgore Rangerettes #Texas Shakespeare Festival #The Back Porch #Van Cliburn