Young mother ordered to pay £265 for putting bin out 24 hours too early May 21, 2008
Posted by curmudgeonblog in politics.add a comment
London Daily Mail | 21st May 2008
Rubbish deal: A young mother faces a £265 legal bill after putting her bins out a day early
Timing is everything as Zoe Watmough has found to her cost after putting her bins out a day early.
As a result, the 22-year-old mother was hauled before magistrates and handed down a legal bill of £265.
Council officers spotted her two bins – a green one for recycling and a grey one – on a Wednesday, 24 hours before it was due to be collected.
The rules of Bolton Council in Greater Manchester dictate bins should not be put out until after 7.30am on the day refuse collectors are due.
At Bolton magistrates court Zoe was fined £125, ordered to pay £125 costs and a £15 victim surcharge.
The court was told the council is pursuing prosecutions over bins left on streets because of the number of arson attacks by youths in the area.
It is estimated the cost of attending a bin fire is £1,900, and they cost the fire service up to £3million each year across the country.
But at home Zoe said: “I am flabbergasted.
“There are people committing all sorts of crimes and getting away with it. Yet I have left my bin out and have been fined the best part of £300.
“Everybody in this area puts their bins out the day before collection. I don’t see what the problem is and can’t afford to pay the fine.”
The court heard Miss Watmough had already been sent a warning by council officers who spotted last November that her bins were out before collection day.
When they spotted them out on a second occasion – in January – Miss Watmough was given a £75 fine. That resulted in a prosecution because she did not pay it within seven days.
Run-ins with councils over bin collection and their contents are not unusual.
Retired milkman Barry Freezer recently made the mistake of dumping cabbage stalks in his bin and incurred the wrath of the council’s waste collection supremos.
The 73-year-old says they treated him like a criminal and refused to collect his garden waste, claiming the cabbage trimmings were kitchen rubbish.
The binmen were following an obscure rule that forbids food that may have come into contact with meat from being mixed with garden waste for composting, to prevent outbreaks of diseases such as foot and mouth.
The week before it emerged the same council had refused to empty the bin of partially sighted ex-Desert Rat Lenny Woodward, 95, because he put a ketchup bottle and an empty coffee jar in the wrong bin.
Teenager, 15, facing prosecution for holding a sign labelling Scientology ‘a cult’ May 21, 2008
Posted by curmudgeonblog in politics.add a comment
London Daily Mail | 21st May 2008
A 15-year-old facing prosecution for holding up a placard which branded Scientology a “cult” has appealed for help to fight possible charges.
The unnamed teenager was served the summons by City of London police after taking part in a peaceful demonstration opposite the Church’s London headquarters, on May 10.
Demonstrators from the anti-Scientology group, Anonymous were outside the church’s £23m headquarters near St Paul’s cathedral when the boy was “strongly advised” by police to get rid of the sign which said: “Scientology is not a religion, it is a dangerous cult”.
A 15-year-old boy is facing prosecution for holding a sign branding The Church of Scientology, a ‘cult’
A policewoman later read him section five of the Public Order Act and “strongly advised” him to remove the sign.
The section prohibits signs which have representations or words which are threatening, abusive or insulting.
But the teenager refused, and a file is now being passed to the Crown Prosecution Service for possible legal action.
Writing on an anti-Scientology website, the teenager says: “I need precedents, legal advice, definitions and defences.
“I intend to make a big folder with all the defence you can give me, and in case this does get through to court, I will be well prepared.
“Also, what’s the likelihood I’ll need a lawyer? If I do have to get one, it’ll have to come out of my pocket money.”
Ian Haworth from the Cult Information Centre said he would avoid labelling any organisation a “cult”, but said bringing the issue into criminal rather than civil law would be “very serious”.
He added: “If it wasn’t so serious it would be farcical.
“I’m very upset by what appears to have happened. I hope the CPS realise that this is an error and that nothing happens to this young man.”
Liberty director, Shami Chakrabarti, told the Guardian: “This barmy prosecution makes a mockery of Britain’s free speech traditions.
“After criminalising the use of the word ‘cult’, perhaps the next step is to ban the words ‘war’ and ‘tax’ from peaceful demonstrations?”
The teenager is seen in a video on YouTube quoting Mr Justice Latey as having said in a court judgment in 1984 that Scientology was a “cult” and was “corrupt, sinister and dangerous”.
However, a spokeswoman for City Police said they had received complaints about the use of the words “cult” and “scientology kills” and warned protestors their signs breached the Public Order Act.
Chief Supt Rob Bastable said: “City of London Police upholds the right to demonstrate lawfully.
“But we have to balance that with the right of all sections of community not to be alarmed, harassed or distressed as a result of other people’s behaviour.”
The force came under fire in 2006 for accepting thousands of pounds of hospitality from the Church of Scientology.
However a police spokeswoman said this was done in accordance with the force’s regulations.
US Currency discriminates against blind people May 21, 2008
Posted by curmudgeonblog in support.add a comment
Associated Press | May 21, 2008
WASHINGTON — Close your eyes, reach into your wallet and try to distinguish between a $1 bill and a $5 bill. Impossible? It’s also discriminatory, a federal appeals court says.
Since all paper money feels pretty much the same, the government is denying blind people meaningful access to the currency, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Tuesday. The decision could force the Treasury Department to make bills of different sizes or print them with raised markings or other distinguishing features.
The American Council of the Blind sued for such changes, but the government has been fighting the case for about six years.
The U.S. acknowledges the current design hinders blind people, but it argues they have adapted. Some rely on store clerks to help, some use credit cards and others fold certain corners to help distinguish between bills.
“I don’t think we should have to rely on people to tell us what our money is,” said Mitch Pomerantz, the Council of the Blind president.
Others say they manage but not always easily.
“When I pay for something and I get change back, I’m very slow and methodical. I’ll ask, ‘Is this the 10? Is this the five? Is this the one?’ ” said Kim Charlson, the library director at the Perkins School for the Blind, which is Helen Keller’s alma mater.
Some use electronic currency readers. But they can be expensive, and they sometimes have problems with new $20 bills.
“It’s slow,” said Sam McClain, who manages a snack shop in a legislative office building near the Georgia Capitol. He has a currency reader but usually relies on the honesty of his customers. “Sometimes I have 10 or 15 people in here, and I can’t use it.”
The court ruled 2-1 that such adaptations were insufficient under the Rehabilitation Act. The government might as well argue that there’s no need to make buildings accessible to wheelchairs because handicapped people can crawl on all fours or ask passers-by for help, the court said.
“Even the most searching tactile examination will reveal no difference between a $100 bill and a $1 bill. The secretary has identified no reason that requires paper currency to be uniform to the touch,” Judge Judith W. Rogers wrote for the majority.
Courts don’t decide how to design currency. That’s up to the Treasury Department, and the ruling forces the department to address what the court called a discriminatory problem.
That could still take years. But since blindness becomes more common with age, people in their 30s and 40s should know that, when they get older, “they will be able to identify their $1 bills from their fives, tens and twenties,” said Pomerantz, of the Council of the Blind.
Redesigned bills could also mean more job opportunities, since employers often hesitate to hire blind workers for jobs handling money, said Charlson, of the Perkins School for the Blind.
“When there are so few things in your life that you’ve got total control over, being able to even take care of your own money is such a big step, without requiring someone to tell you whether you’ve got enough money to go out and get a beer or have a hamburger,” she said.
The government could ask for a rehearing by the full appeals court or challenge the decision to the Supreme Court.
Treasury Department spokeswoman Brookly McLaughlin said the department was reviewing the opinion. She noted that the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, which prints the nation’s currency, recently hired a contractor to consider ways to help the blind. The results will be available early next year, she said.
While the government has been fighting to overturn the lower court ruling, it has been taking some steps toward modifying U.S. currency for the visually impaired. The most recent currency redesign of the $5 bill introduced in March features a giant “5” printed in purple on one side of the bill to help those with vision problems distinguish the bill.
Indeed, Treasury has previously considered making different sizes of bills but ran into opposition from makers of vending and change machines. Government lawyers raised this issue in court, saying it could cost billions to redesign vending machines. But the court said such data are murky, especially since one proposed solution would be to leave $1 bills unchanged.
Given recent U.S. redesigns, the appeals court ruled the U.S. failed to explain why adding more changes would be an undue burden. More than 100 other countries vary the size of their bills, a federal judge said in 2006, and others include at least some features to help the blind. The European Central Bank, for instance, worked closely with the blind when designing euro notes that varied in size and contained other easily recognizable features.
The appeals court said the U.S. never explained why such solutions wouldn’t work here.
Not all blind people agree that U.S. money should be changed. The National Federation of the Blind sided with the government and told the appeals court that no changes were needed.
Charlie Richardson, the legally blind manager of Charlie’s Express Stop inside the Capitol in Albany, N.Y., said he doesn’t oppose changing the money but disagrees with the ruling.
“To actually be discriminated against is to have something denied to you,” Richardson said. “We’re not denied the use of money.”
——
Associated Press writers Greg Bluestein in Atlanta and Valerie Bauman in Albany, N.Y., contributed to this report.
Michelle Obama fair game May 20, 2008
Posted by curmudgeonblog in politics.add a comment
WASHINGTON — After wife Michelle was attacked last week in a video produced by the Tennessee GOP, Sen. Barack Obama sent a warning to the troublemakers on Monday to “lay off my wife.”
No matter the outcome of the presidential election, the contest has served to permanently vault Michelle Obama from relative obscurity to fame, as she has taken on major fund-raising and surrogate speaking roles on behalf of her husband, even phoning superdelegates to try to close the deal for him. Michelle Obama has her own chief of staff and press secretary, and campaign advance staffers handle her larger events, where she has turned out to be a significant draw in her own right.
Just as Bill Clinton at times has been at times a mixed blessing for Sen. Hillary Clinton, and Cindy McCain has been in the news because she won’t release her tax returns, Michelle Obama — one of the campaign’s greatest assets — has also stirred up controversy. Spouses are not exempt from scrutiny if they are major surrogates.
The most significant jam Michelle Obama has gotten herself into was back in February, when she said, “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m proud of my country.” Last week, the Tennessee Republican Party came out with a video featuring a clip with Michelle Obama’s quote.
Asked about this, Sen. Obama said, “The GOP, should I be the nominee, I think can say whatever they want to say about me, my track record. If they think that they’re going to try to make Michelle an issue in this campaign, they should be careful.
“Because that I find unacceptable, the notion that you start attacking my wife or my family. Michelle is the most honest, the best person I know. She is one of the most caring people I know. She loves this country. And for them to try to distort or to play snippets of her remarks in ways that are unflattering to her I think is just low-class. And I think most of the American people would think that as well.
“Whoever is in charge of the Tennessee GOP needs to think long and hard about the kind of campaign that they want to run, and I think that’s true for everybody, Democrat or Republican.”
He left the topic with this threat: “But I also think these folks should lay off my wife. All right? Just in case they’re watching.”
I agree with Lynn Sweet! Any candidate’s spouse who participates in the campaign exposes himself or herself to scrutiny. Obama can’t attack Bill Clinton for his comments on the campaign trail, then exempt his own wife as off limits.
That said, if Michelle Obama had a do-over, she’d probably say, “I feel this incredible rush of pride for my country; stronger than I have ever felt before.”
Phishing ring busted May 19, 2008
Posted by curmudgeonblog in tech.add a comment
WASHINGTON (AP) — Thirty-eight people were charged Monday with stealing names, Social Security numbers, credit card data and other personal information from unsuspecting Internet users as part of a global crime ring.
More than half of the people charged are Romanian, but the scam also operated in the United States.
The Romanian-based phishing scams sought to rip off thousands of consumers and hundreds of financial institutions, according to indictments unsealed in Los Angeles and New Haven, Connecticut.The two related cases marked the latest example of what the Justice Department describes as a growing worldwide threat posed by organized crime.
“International organized crime poses a serious threat not only to the United States and Romania, but to all nations,” Deputy Attorney General Mark R. Filip said in a statement from Bucharest, where he announced the charges. “Criminals who exploit the power and convenience of the Internet do not recognize national borders; therefore our efforts to prevent their attacks cannot end at our borders either.”
The practice known as phishing typically involves sending fraudulent e-mails that include links directing recipients to fake Web sites where they are asked to input sensitive data.
Phishers may also include attachments that, when clicked, secretly install “spyware” that can capture personal information and send it to third parties over the Internet.
More than half of the people charged in Monday’s cases are Romanian, although the alleged scam also operated from the United States, Canada, Portugal and Pakistan. The cases were linked by two Romanians who participated in both schemes, authorities said.
In Los Angeles, 33 people faced a 65 counts on a bevy of charges, including racketeering, bank fraud and identity theft. Prosecutors say phishers based in Romania snagged information about thousands of credit and debit card accounts and other personal data from people who answered spam e-mail.
The data were then sent to the U.S. and encoded on magnetic cards that could be used to withdraw money from bank accounts.
One encoder in the scam, identified only as Seuong Wook Lee, pleaded guilty last week in federal court in Los Angeles to racketeering conspiracy, bank fraud, access device fraud and unauthorized access of a protected computer.
Meanwhile, in Connecticut, seven Romanians allegedly spammed consumers with directions to visit a hacked-in Web site posing as at least a half-dozen legitimate bank sites, including Citibank, Wells Fargo and PayPal.
The seven Romanians — including two also involved in the Los Angeles scheme — were indicted in January in charges that were unsealed only last week. One of them, Ovidiu-Ionut Nicola-Roman, was arrested in Bulgaria last summer and extradited to the United States in November.
As Prices Rise, Crime Tipsters Work Overtime May 17, 2008
Posted by curmudgeonblog in Uncategorized.add a comment
New York Times
By SHAILA DEWAN and BRENDA GOODMAN
To gas prices, the cost of rice and foreclosure rates, add this economic indicator: the number of tips to the police from people hoping to collect reward money.
Cheers for Olive Garden May 15, 2008
Posted by curmudgeonblog in raves.add a comment
My, how the Olive Garden has improved!
Fourteen years ago, I swore off after being treated badly. It was my son Eric’s 8th grade graduation celebration, and we were late for our reservation.
Although the restaurant was half empty, the staff was quite rude about our late arrival (the ceremonies went longer than expected), even though we apologized.
Unhappy with the treatment, I completed a comment card (or wrote a letter, I can’t remember which) and sent it to headquarters. No response.
I swore off Olive Garden for twelve years. But when friends gave me a gift card a couple years ago, we gave it another try.
What a difference! We have been back many times over the past two years and have not been disappointed. The service has been spectacular, the food tasty and affordable, and the table wait has not been long.
So, two Curmudgeonly thumbs up for Olive Garden! They really do treat you like family.
MySpace spammers fined $230m May 15, 2008
Posted by curmudgeonblog in tech.add a comment
A team of notorious American internet spammers has been fined a record $230m for bombarding MySpace users with adverts for pornography and gambling websites.
“Spam king” Sanford Wallace, along with his business partner Walter Rines, were yesterday ordered to pay unprecedented damages to the social networking website – amounting to the strongest punishment ever handed out to a spammer in the US.
A court in Los Angeles heard how Wallace and Rines sent more than 700,000 messages to MySpace users, fooling them into visiting gambling sites or adult-rated pages. Disguised as comments from the user’s friends, the notes in fact contained advertisements that made the pair a small fee every time somebody was fooled into clicking on them.
Although evidence suggested that the pair made around $500,000 from their activities, district judge Audrey Collins used the terms of America’s CAN-SPAM Act – which can levy up to $300 for each infringement of the law.
Wallace has long been one of the world’s most high-profile junk marketers, earning the nickname “Spamford” for his recurring trouble with the law. In the early 1990s he progressed from circulating fax messages to sending internet spam – and rose to prominence as the head of infamous Philadelphia-based spam giant Cyber Promotions.
The duo, who failed to turn up at court for the judgment, were also banned from similar activities in the future – though experts said it may not deter them.
“These two spammers are just the tip of an iceberg,” said Graham Cluley, senior technology consultant for internet security company Sophos. “Even if MySpace were to extricate the fine from these two men – which seems unlikely given their past record – there will be plenty more cybercriminals trying to make money from junk email.”
The $230m fine is many times greater than previous records for such activities, and is almost half of the $580m paid by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation for MySpace itself in 2005. Hemanshu Nigam, the website’s chief security officer, said the company would continue suing spammers who abused its systems.
“MySpace has zero tolerance for those who attempt to act illegally on our site,” Nigam said. “We remain committed to punishing those who violate the law and try to harm our members.”
Curmudgeon's Weblog 