Steff

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8090170/ Woman who helped rape, kill 2 teens to go free But Canadian judge orders monitoring, psychiatric help Updated: 7:20 p.m. ET June 3, 2005JOLIETTE, Quebec - Notorious Canadian sex criminal Karla Homolka will not be able to melt anonymously back into society following her release from prison after 12 years, a Quebec court ruled Friday. Judge Jean Beaulieu ruled that on her release in early July Homolka must keep police apprised on a weekly basis of her whereabouts and travel plans. The judge also ordered that Homolka undergo psychiatric therapy to properly accept responsibility for her role in the rape, torture and killing of two teenage girls in the early 1990s, which saw her convicted of manslaughter. “This person refuses to discuss in detail the circumstances of her crimes in the framework of therapy,” Beaulieu said in rendering his judgment. “One must be wary in the case of serious crimes of someone who does not have the courage or desire to go to the heart of things.” Homolka has indicated that on her release she wants to live in the Montreal area, 410 miles from where the crimes were committed in neighboring Ontario. Lingering threat? Authorities in both provinces fought to keep her under close watch after she ended her sentence. Her legal team opposed the requests, arguing Homolka had served her time and posed no threat to society. Louis Morissette, a psychiatrist hired by the defense team for Homolka, said the 35-year-old did not represent an immediate threat to society, despite crimes that horrified Canada more than a decade ago. “Is Madame dangerous?”, Homolka’s lawyer Sylvie Bordelais asked Morissette. “It’s a not a question that can be answered with a yes or a no,” the psychiatrist replied. “In the short term, no.” Problematic relationships Other experts argued on Thursday that Homolka remained a risk, and Morissette agreed that she remained psychologically vulnerable in relationships with men. She has been communicating with Jean-Paul Gerbet, a 38-year-old French national serving a life sentence in Quebec for strangling his girlfriend to death. But Morissette said that even though Homolka and Gerbet had exchanged letters and one kiss, he is “not available” as a partner for her because he may be deported after he serves his sentence. Gerbet will be eligible for parole in early 2008. The psychiatrist said Homolka has indicated that her “criteria” for a future partner include a man who values marriage and children, likes pets and has no history of violence against women. Homolka’s partner in crime, her former husband Paul Bernardo, is serving a life sentence for the kidnapping, rape, torture and murder of two teenage girls in the early 1990s in St. Catharines, Ontario. Plea bargain Homolka, a former veterinarian’s assistant, also had a key role in the earlier rape and death of her 15-year-old sister Tammy, but she agreed to testify against Bernardo in a plea bargain that Canadian media dubbed a deal with the devil. She cut the deal and pleaded guilty to manslaughter before police recovered videotapes showing Homolka appeared to be a willing participant in the lengthy assaults of Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy. Homolka has insisted throughout court proceedings that Bernardo forced her to participate in the crimes by threatening and using violence against her. I understand that her deal was made previous to the tapes being found.. but good grief.. something's got to be done to be able to revoke deals if the defendant withholds information of their involvment. :headshake

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_a...0054.shtml?5day Tex think you'll be effected by her..?

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 09:11 PM) Obviously didn't read the sig guidelines. Check out the following link before posting another one: http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=31757 Is there a way that that can be required reading before a new account is created..?

QUOTE(56789 @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 11:48 PM) I just found a perfect example to the comment on how admins and moderaters are treated better than other posters. In the NHL Salary Cap thread people would say something bad about the NHL and everyone would say "If you dont like the NHL stay out of an NHL thread" well then aboz comes in and says "the nhl :sleep :sleep :sleep " and no one says a word to him. What's the difference between that and the NASCAR haters doing the same thing.. ? It's not like he came in and said "the NHL sucks and you all that care about it are idiots..".

QUOTE(Jabroni @ Jun 10, 2005 -> 02:11 AM) I just thought it was funny that Hawk's catch-phrases bother the person so much that they would make a website about him. That's exactly what I said when a few of us found this site a while ago. Kind of like how some Sox fans are obsessed with the Cubs... :sleep

MT.. glad you had a good time. I went out there the year it opened and loved it. The fans I specifically remember were very friendly. They really seem to enjoy baseball.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 10:07 PM) I just saw this and am not gonna be around much so was gonna just ask a quick question (don't have time to read the whole thread right now). Is this actually being reported as a possibility or more a name being bantied around by fans? Apparently it was a blurb on XM earlier in the day..

QUOTE(sec159row2 @ Jun 2, 2005 -> 01:22 PM) ps... stef... you should be ashamed of yourself for comparing frank to barry... People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.. You've got quite a bit to be ashamed of yourself there 159...

QUOTE(marsh @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 08:07 PM) sorry for misinterpreting your post. It seems that you do have some issue with Kittle that you question him moreso than barry. Is that a correct statement? It's obvious that Bonds does indeed sign for white people. I don't think that is in dispute. would you mind elaborating on your stance. I understand if you can't because you don't want to divulge privy info. I don't doubt Barry said something.. to the degree Kittle is remembering it is what I question.

QUOTE(marsh @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 05:10 PM) I saw your post on WSI on this subject and your stance on the matter seems to be that Barry has signed things for white people so that means that Kittle is a liar. Why isn't it possible that Barry made the comment just to be an ass on that particular day? Just because he has signed for white people doesn't automatically mean he didn't make the comment. This could be easily solved if the journalists went to either matt williams or dusty and ask them what happened since they supposedly heard the convo. I don't know either bonds or kittle personally so I'm only going on what i've read. No.. that's not my stance.

Hoped he had just said "he's a liar".. but that wouldn't be Barry.

I don't wear it but my favorite by far is my Seaver 300th win jersey auto'd by Seaver & Fisk.

QUOTE(Goldmember @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 03:56 PM) ninja turtles... Thanks..

QUOTE(Iwritecode @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 03:38 PM) You know you're in trouble when you see her finger waving though... LMAO.. Poor Ken. I saw him last Sunday cause we were in the Scout Seats (and I never see him anymore since he moved) and he was like "there she is... " turns to the guy he was walking in the tunnel with and says.. "don't ever tick this girl off..." and did the " "

QUOTE(Queen Prawn @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 03:38 PM) And not so holy Shredder: QP is that from the He-Man cartoons..?

QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 03:43 PM) Yes he did... Let's also not forget Ellis Burks and Mike Devereaux! Uh no.. let's forget Ellis..

Hmmm.. looks a little leggy there. For those that have seen him standing up straight.. is he as tall as Brandon..? And Cerb.. how fast is he throwing right now?

Picture please...???

Dave Martinez... and didn't Paco paly a little OF also..?

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 03:23 PM) Right now we have Podsednik, Rowand, Dye, Everett, and Perez for outfielders. What we need to do is get Cameron, Singleton, Ordonez, and Lee and bring up Borchard, Sweeney, and Anderson. Trade everyone else including Frank and so we can have an all outfield team. If you're not an outfielder, we don't want you. Oh we need Jeff Abbott too. Don't forget Lyle Mouton, Bo Jackson, and Albert..

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 03:15 PM) Mike Cameron whined after being traded by the Sox. Why would we want him back? He found about about being traded on the ESPN ticker.. I think he had every right to call the orginization a bunch of unprofessional assholes, sic.

QUOTE(Chisoxrd5 @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 03:12 PM) I honestly dont think you've ever disagreed with any of my posts...I'm still waiting for the day!!! Bring it Eh.. you only just passed 1k posts.. I don't bother with ya until you have at least 2k..

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 03:02 PM) I can give you 7,333,333 reasons it won't happen. All that's needed is one.. the way he was traded.

This is old.. but I had never heard of it.. http://www.forbes.com/2002/05/09/0509portnick.html Dan Ackman, 05.09.02, 2:10 PM ET NEW YORK - The idea of a fitness company being sued for refusing to hire a fat aerobics instructor sounds like science fiction. Or San Francisco. But the curious case of Jennifer Portnick has a few wrinkles. Jennifer Portnick: fit to teach? Portnick is the 5-foot-8-inch, 240-pound San Francisco woman who sought work as an aerobics instructor with Jazzercise, a franchise operation with 5,000 certified instructors nationwide. The company turned her down, citing its policy that instructors possess a "fit appearance." Portnick countered that she may not appear fit, but she was fit in fact. She brought her case before the San Francisco Human Rights Commission, the body that enforces that city's ordinance that bars discrimination on the basis of height or weight. Jazzercise, a Carlsbad, Calif.-based company that markets what it calls "the world's leading dance-fitness program," settled with Portnick, agreeing to drop the "fit appearance" standard. It even agreed that the standard was "debatable" and said, "Recent studies document that it may be possible for people of varying weights to be fit." It may be hard to argue--though some do--that a health club shouldn't have the right to please its customers by presenting them with a trim instructor aerobics instructor in spandex. The difficulty in the Portnick case was that Portnick, 38, wasn't just looking for a job; she was an entrepreneur who wanted to buy a franchise. Jazzercise sells the rights to market classes to anyone who qualifies as a certified Jazzercise instructor. To obtain certification, a potential instructor pays the company $650 and enrolls in a three-day workshop. If she passes muster, she is then responsible for renting her own space and attracting her own customers. Instructors pay Jazzercize 20% of the gross. After taking a look at Portnick, though, privately-held Jazzercise, which has annual revenue of $17 million, didn't want her money. Portnick, incidentally, has had the last laugh. In January, she was certified by the Aerobics and Fitness Association of America. Since then she has started to teach classes of her own design, which she says are oversubscribed. She has also been hired by the East Bay YMCA. Portnick may become the most famous aerobics instructor since Jane Fonda. When it comes to teaching aerobics, Jane Fonda is the norm and size-18 types need not apply. This is not only because seriously fit people, the type inclined to teach aerobics, tend to be thin. It is also because aerobics students see their instructors as role models, and because these students would rather look up and see a lithe body screaming "turn!" or "kick!" or "You go, girl!" or whatever it is aerobics instructors scream nowadays. This role-model theory of fitness is a big part of the problem, says Lynn McAfee, director of medical advocacy for the Council on Size and Weight Discrimination. McAfee says anyone who thinks he is going to lose weight from doing aerobics is fooling himself (or being fooled), and adds that perhaps 90% of all diets fail long term. Some people are just naturally big. A woman like Portnick, who says she works out six or more times a week, "is the best role model" because she is fit despite her size, McAfee says. "If you can do the job, I don't care what you look like." Discrimination against obese people is pervasive and stigmatizing, not idiosyncratic, much like racial discrimination. "It's not a small matter," she says. McAfee sees anti-weight discrimination laws as the logical extension of other anti-discrimination laws. Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of The Litigation Explosion, agrees, and says that's precisely the problem. "I am sorry to see the number of categories [of people who can sue for discrimination] proliferating," he says. Laws restricting or influencing who a health club might hire ultimately impinge on the freedom of health club customers, Olson says. He calls using the law to influence their thoughts akin to policing thought, and would only allow it in cases like racial discrimination where there is historical proof of "something sick in society in general." He says if people believe that skinny aerobics instructors are inspirational, or if they are simply attracted to beautiful people, health clubs are right to hire them. All franchise operations have an interest in protecting the value of their trademarks. But in this situation, much of the risk of failure is on the instructor. For this reason, McAfee calls the rejection of Portnick's application an "extreme form of discrimination." Anti-weight discrimination laws, which also exist in just three other cities and the state of Michigan, are a kind of Rorschach test for discrimination laws of all kinds. Such laws traditionally restrict behavior that can be seen as irrational even in a market sense--such as a hotel refusing to serve black people, explains Mark Kelman, a professor at Stanford Law School. At the other end of the extreme are laws that do impose costs, such as by requiring an employer to accommodate a physically disabled worker's slower pace. But most real-life situations fall somewhere in between the poles represented by the telemarketer and the fashion model. Any job that requires interaction with the public is partly a sales job and image is part of it. If customers prefer to deal with a pretty salesman, that's a fact of life. "You play the cards you're dealt," Olson says. On the other hand, if customers prefer to deal with only white stockbrokers or only female flight attendants, the law would deny that preference. "When is a customer preference irrational?" Kelman asks. It's clearly rational for a customer to demand that a waiter bring his food. "But is it OK if I demand my waiter be obsequious?" Kelman asks. It probably is OK. But what if the customer also demands that his waiter be thin, or physically attractive, or wear low-cut blouses, or be white? The Portnick case raises all kinds of questions about how to draw the lines.

QUOTE(Chisoxrd5 @ Jun 9, 2005 -> 02:51 PM) I have a fear that Steff is gonna tear me apart!! Pfffttt... ask anyone that's met me.. my bark is much worse than my bite.