Criminal Law 9 Offences Against Property

Theft – The Theft offence is defined under S1 of the ‘Theft act 1968’. Where it provides that if ‘A person dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another, with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it,’ will be guilty of the offence. For this charge to be upheld, both the actus Reus and the mens rea have to be established. Actus Reus – Beginning with the physical element of the crime, the actus Reus it is made up of 3 elements – ‘appropriates, property, belonging to another. ’ Appropriation is defined in S3, ‘Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner amounts to appropriation. This includes coming across the property innocently or not without stealing it and treating the property how the owner would. Examples of this would be using, eating, selling, destroying, lending/hiring the property. The case examples are: ? ‘Pitman v Hehl (1977)’ – ‘defendant sold propert y belonging to another. Offer of sale is an assumption of right. It didn’t matter whether the property was removed or not. ? ‘Morris, (1983)’ – At least one assumption of all the rights Switched price labels in shop. ? ‘Lawrence (1971)’ – With consent An Italian student paying for taxi ride, ? 6 instead of 50p. ‘Gomez’- Lied about cheques so friend could take supplied goods. Dishonestly appropriating goods, induced through fraud, deception or a false representation to consent. ? ‘Hinks’ – Consent without deception, got naive friend to put money in account. Said where gifts however also results to appropriation. Property has been defined under S4; this includes money, real property (buildings and land, personal property, things in action (bank accounts) and other intangible assets. (e. g. Patent) ? Kelly and Lindsay (1998) – Taken body parts from the royal college of surgeons to make casts.Normally dead bodies are not property however; belonged to the royal college. ? A-G of Hong Kong v Chan Nai-Keung- Stolen quota ? Oxford v Moss – Not intangible property , – knowledge of the questions on a exam paper ? Wild mushrooms and plants cannot be property unless it is taken for reward or commercial purposes. Not theft if creatures are wild, but theft if they are in captivity or owned. Belonging to another is defined under S5, ‘property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control over it, or having in it any proprietary right or interest. Therefore prosecution do not have to prove who the legal owner is. ‘Turner (no. 2) (1971)’ Stealing own car Garage was in control of the property as he left it with them to make repairs and pay thereafter. Guilty, when property may not belong to another. (1) Trust property, where trustee steals it (2) Property received under obligation – ‘Hall, (1972)’ – Travel agent, deposits for client tickets. Klineberg and Marsden,’ Obligation to make deposits in a certain way. Timeshare apartments. ‘Davidge V Bunnett’ Money for bill but didn’t. 3)Property received by another’s mistake – ‘A-G Reference (No 1 of 1983) (1985) – Salary overpaid through bank transfer, had an obligation to repay. Mens Rea – Within the offence of the theft the mental element of the crime the mens rea is the ‘dishonest intention’. Dishonesty, it has to be proved that they defendant appropriated dishonestly, there is no definition under S2 however it states that it is irrelevant whether it was made with a view of gain or own benefit. Therefore meaning if the other entire elements are present the defendant’s motive is not relevant.S2 provides 3 situations in which the defendant’s behaviour is not dishonest. If a genuine belief in one of the three below not guilty. A) He has in law the right to deprive the other of it, on behalf of himself of a third person. b) He would have the consent if the other knew of the appropriation and the circumstance of it. c) The person who the property belongs to cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps. Willing to pay – it doesn’t prevent dishonest conduct. ‘A person’s appropriation of property belonging to another may be dishonest notwithstanding that he is willing to pay for the property. The Ghosh Test (1982) – Leading case on dishonesty. Ghosh a doctor, (a locum consultant) at hospital, He claimed fees for operations he had not carried out. COA decided dishonestly has both objective and subjective element. 1. Was the action dishonest according to the ordinary standards of reasonable & honest people? Objective 2. Did the defendant realise that what he was doing was dishonest by those standards? Subjective Here the jury would start was the objective test, if it was proved to be dishonest it was carried to the subjective test, however if it was not dishonest he would be acquitted.Intention to permanently deprive this is the final element, which is defined in S6. ‘Velumyl’ – Company manager took ? 1050 from safe. He said owed money to a friend and would replace later. COA upheld conviction as he has intention of permanently depriving company of banknotes. Permanent e. g. destroys property ‘DPP v Lavender (1994) – took doors from council property at time of repair and used to replace damage door in girlfriend council flat. Borrowing is not theft unless it is for a period and in circumstances making it equivalent to taking it or disposal Lloyd’ – Not theft, film taken copied and brought back undamaged. ‘Easom’ – The defendant picked up a handbag in a cinema, rummaged through its contents and then put it back without having taken anything, condition intention, not guilty. Robbery is an offence defined under S8 o f the ‘Theft act 1968’, it provides’ A person is guilty of robbery if he steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force,’ will be convicted of robbery.This is basically aggravated theft, by the use or/and threat of force. For robbery, theft must be completed for robbery to be committed, all the elements of theft need to be present, and therefore if there is no theft, there is no robbery. The elements which have to be proved for the actus Reus of robbery are:- 1. Theft 2. Force or putting or seeking to put any person in fear of force. ( immediately before or at time of theft and must be in order to steal) Completed Theft – Where force is used to steal, the moment that theft is complete, there is a robbery.A case example is Corcoran v Anderton (1980) – Defendant hit woman in back and then tugged at her bag. She let go of the bag, however the defendants ran off without it, as the lady was screaming. It was held that theft occurred, therefore guilty of robbery, (temporary Appropriation). If she had not let go of the bag, theft would not be completed, but could be charged with attempted robbery, (s9 (2) Theft Act 1968). Force or threat of force – The prosecution must prove that there was a force or threat of force present. This is determined by the jury. It has been said the amount of force use can be small. In ‘R v Dawson’, one the defendant nudged the victim causing loss of balance so the other could take his wallet. Jury to decide if the force was present; charged with robbery †¢ In R v ‘Clouden’, the defendant had wrenched on the victim’s handbag from her hands. COA held that whilst taking of property without resistance from the owner, should not amount to robbery, the question of force ‘on any person’ should be left to the jury. The force must be immediately before or at the time of the theft. – It is decided by the jury the length of theft, but it has been held that theft is a continuing act. When theft is completed. ‘Hale (1979)’, the two defendants forced their way in. One defendant put his hand over her mouth to stop her screaming while the other went upstairs and took a jewellery box and then tied up her up before leaving. COA, force of hand over mouth and theft ongoing. †¢ ‘R v Lockley’, the defendant The defendant, with two others, was caught shoplifting cans of beer from an off-licence and used force on the shopkeeper who was trying to stop them escaping   The defendant appealed on the basis that the theft was complete when he used the force, but the Court of Appeal followed Hale and dismissed his appeal. On any person – This force or threat of force can be put on any; it does not have to be the person from whom the threat occurs. An exampl e situation is bank robbery and force on customers. – Force in order to steal – If force is not used in order to steal it is not robbery, example being fight between defendant and victim and then theft. The defendant charged with OAPA and also theft. For the mens rea of robbery it must be proved that the defendant had the:- 1. Intention for theft 2. Intended to use force to steal. Burglary offence is under S9 of ‘Theft act 1968. It defines 2 different ways to commit burglary. Common elements of both, (a) entry (b) of building or part of building, (c) as trespasser. Under S9(1)(a)‘A person is guilty of burglary if he enters any building or part of a building as a trespasser , with intent to steal, rape, do unlawful damage and inflict gbh. Under S9(1)(b)‘ A person is guilty of burglary if he enters any building or part of a building as a trespasser, he steals or attempts to steal anything in the building or inflicts or attempts to inflict gbh on any per son in the building. Actus ReusNot defined in ‘Theft act 1968’, but there are several cases of the meaning. ‘Collins’ – COA, Jury satisfied that D made ‘effective and substantial entry’ ‘R v Brown’ – ‘Effective entry’. D was outside shop window leaning in, looking through goods. ‘Ryan (1996)’ – D entered, trapped in window of a house at 2:30am, half body inside. The theft act gives extended meaning for the word building, but a basic definition is not given, however never really a problem with this. It includes houses, flats, offices, factories†¦ It also includes outbuilding and sheds.Large storage containers – ‘B and S v Leathley (1979) A freezer container had been in a farmyard and been used for storage. It had be held to be a building Part of building. This is where a defendant has permission to be one area of the building however not another. ‘Walkington (197 9) – D went to the counter of the shop and open the till. S (9) (1) (a). Defendant to be committed of burglary he must enter as a trespasser. If have permission – not a trespasser. ‘Collins’ – Drunken defendant wanted sex, he saw an open window and climbed a ladder to look. A naked girl was asleep in†¦ Entered the room.She thought he was her boyfriend †¦ they had sex. Charged under S9 (1) (a), Enter, trespasser with intent to rape. On appeal, conviction quashed as he was not a trespasser. A defendant can become a trespasser even if he has a permission to enter. This is when the defendant goes beyond the given permission. ‘Smith and Jones (1976)’ – Smith and friend went to smiths fathers house and took two television sets without his father’s knowledge/ permission. His father stated that his son is not a trespasser, (general permission to enter). However COA, guilty of Burglary, S9 (1) (b), ‘entering in acce ss of the permission given to him’.In line with ‘Barker v R (1983)’ Neighbour to look after property, told defendant that there is a key hidden if needed, but however entered property to steal. Mens Rea – 2 parts Both, S9 (1) (a) and S9 (1) (b), must intend or be subjectively reckless to enter as a trespasser. With S9 (1) (a) the defendant will also need the intention of committing at least one of the four offences stated when entering. He needs intention to steal or condition intention. For S9 (1) (b) the defendant must also have the mens rea for theft or gbh when committing or attempting to commit the actus Reus of burglary.Deception Offences (Fraud) and Making off without payment. Deception Offences ? Obtaining property by deception (s15 Theft Act 1968); ? Obtaining services by deception (s1 Theft Act 1978); ? Evading liability by deception (s2 (1) Theft Act 1978). Common Elements – (1) Deception (2) obtaining/evading (3) Dishonesty [pic]Basic de finition is stated in S15 (4) Theft Act 1968. ‘Any deception (whether deliberate or reckless) by words or conduct as to the fact or as to law, including a deception as to the present intentions of the person using the deception or any other person’.It applies to all 3 offences. It makes clear the deception can be words, silence, conduct†¦ Deception definition – ‘DPP v Ray (1973)’ – Lord Reid. ‘Deceive is to induce a man to believe that a thing is true which is false, and which the person practising deceit knows or believe it to be false’ Deception can be deliberate or reckless. Spoken or written words -‘Silverman- (1987)’ D gave excessive quotation to 2 elderly sisters, after building a good relationship from past. COA said it is deception. Quashed because jury. – Conduct (e. g. alse cards, uniform) – ‘Barnard- (1837)’ went in to shop in oxford worn student clothes, and stated that he w as a student, so could get sold products on credit. False pretent Silence– Can be implied in certain situations, ‘DPP v Ray’ – (1973). Went to restaurant with friends, he didn’t have enough money but friend agreed to pay, however they all decided not to pay and then ran out of restaurant. Circumstances Also when circumstances have changed – ‘Rai – (2000)’ – Applied for grant for downstairs bathroom for elderly mother. It approved but she died, did not tell council. Firth 1990)’ – Doctor who failed to inform the NHS hospital, that some patients were private, he avoided paying charged to the hospital. Use of cheques When a person writes a cheque, it implies that they have the bank account and money in this, to pay for the cheque, representations of fact. ‘Gilmartin (1983)’ D paid for supplies with a post dates cheque which he knew would not be met. Use of cheque guarantee cards – It i s issued by the bank on current accounts, which has a limit of ? 50- ? 100. The bank guarantees that a cheque up to a specific amount will be met by bank. ‘Charles (1976)’. D bank account had overdraft of up to ? 00. Has cheque guarantee card for up to ? 30. Not meant to use more than 1 a do. Wrote 25 of ? 30, also knew he no sufficient funds. HOL, false representation S16, Theft act 1968 (Obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception. Credit cards. Representations, user of card is the name on card and has the authority of Card Company to use it. ‘Lambie (1981)’ D had a Barclaycard credit card which had a limit of ? 200; she exceeded limit and bank asked for card to be returned. HOL reinstated it. Deception as to fact, law intention. False statement about the law can be deception and also deception about the facts. King and Stockwell (1987)’ The falsely represented to woman that they were reputable firm of tree surgeon, and made false claims to make h er agree to pay for work. Attempting to obtain property by deception. [pic]As well as proving deception, it must be shown that a person was deceived and property/service/ evade liability as a result of deception. Common in all deception offences. Deception is not relevant to the person to whom it is made. ‘Laverty’. D changed number plates and chassis of car and sold to plaintiff. Not deception as plaintiff thought he was owner and no prove of deception. Etim v Hatfield’ D produced false declaration to PO clerk that he was entitled to supplementary benefits. Clerk gave him ? 10. 60. Without deception no payment would be given. Machines, not possible for deception to happen, however it may be charged as theft. Deception after obtaining is not deception. ‘Collis-Smith’ D filled car up with petrol and claimed that his company would pay for his petrol. Ownership of petrol passed to him. Led to new law of the theft act 1978 under, S2. [pic] It must be pro ved in all deception offences. The Ghosh Test (1982) – Leading case on dishonesty. Ghosh a doctor, (a locum consultant) at hospital.He claimed fees for operations he had not carried out. COA decided dishonestly has both objective and subjective element. †¢ Was the action dishonest according to the ordinary standards of reasonable & honest people? Objective †¢ Did the defendant realise that what he was doing was dishonest by those standards? Subjective Here the jury would start was the objective test, if it was proved to be dishonest it was carried to the subjective test, however if it was not dishonest he would be acquitted. – Intention to permanently deprive, S15 (3) states that S6 shall apply to this offence, the word ‘‘appropriation’ is changed to ‘obtaining. – Makes the deception deliberately or to be reckless as to whether they are deceiving others Obtaining Property by Deception is defined in S15 of the Theft act 1968 it states that any deception made to dishonestly obtain property belonging to another, with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. It is similar to theft however property must be obtained through deception. Most offences of obtaining by deception could also be charged with theft, since the case of Gomez which overlapped these laws. Actus Reus. Obtain – S15 (2), states that obtain means ‘obtaining ownership, possession or control of it.Any one is sufficient; makes clear that obtaining can be for another person or to enable another person or to keep it. Property – It has the same meaning as it theft. It includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action (bank accounts) and other intangible assets (e. g. Patents). The only difference being that it has no restrictions on obtaining land (limited situations) Belonging to another has the same meaning as in theft, therefore it means ‘any person having possession or con trol over it, or having in it any proprietary right or interest. ’Obtaining because of deception – As well as proving deception, it must be shown that a person was deceived and property obtained as a result of deception. Deception is not relevant to the person to whom it is made. ’ Laverty’. D changed number plates and chassis of car and sold to plaintiff. Not deception as plaintiff thought that defendant was owner, no proof of deception. ‘Etim v Hatfield’ D produced false declaration to PO clerk that he was entitled to benefits. Clerk gave him ? 10. 60. Without deception no payment would be given. Deception after obtaining is not deception. Collis-Smith’ D filled car up with petrol and claimed that his company would pay for his petrol. Ownership passed to him. Led to S2 theft act 1978 Mens rea – Dishonest – The Ghosh Test (1982) – Leading case on dishonesty. Ghosh a doctor, (a locum consultant) at hospital. He cla imed fees for operations he had not carried out. COA decided dishonestly has both objective and subjective element. †¢ Was the action dishonest according to the ordinary standards of reasonable & honest people? O †¢ Did the defendant realise that what he was doing was dishonest by those standards? SHere the jury would start was the objective test, if it was proved to be dishonest it was carried to the subjective test, however if it was not dishonest he would be acquitted. – Intention to permanently deprive, S15 (3) states that S6 shall apply to this offence, the word ‘‘appropriation’ is changed to ‘obtaining. ‘ – Makes the deception deliberately or to be reckless as to whether they are deceiving others Obtaining Services by Deception is a offence under S1 of Theft act 1978, which states, ‘S1 (1) A person who by any deception dishonestly obtains services from another shall be guilty of an offence.S1 (2) It is an obtaining o f services where the other is induced to confer a benefit by doing some act, or causing or permitting some act to be done, on the understanding that the benefit has been or will be paid for. The defendant make the other person induce to confer a benefit by: AR Doing some act Causing some act to be done Permitting some act to be done This part of the actus Reus covers a wide range of situations of the ways that the offence can be committed. The act must cause a benefit to the defendant and must be proved that the benefit ‘has been or will be paid for. If the benefit is free there is no offence even if the defendant was dishonest. The victim doesn’t have to suffer any loss. Service – E. g. haircut, hotel stay, entertainment activity, film, repair of goods, cleaning and decoration etc. ‘Widdowson’ obtaining of hire purchases in order to buy a car was a service. ‘Halai’ Mortgage advantage not a service. But S1 (3) inserted into S1 by the the ft, (amendment) act 1996. Now contained in S1 theft 1978. ‘Sofroniou’ – Obtaining loans through a bank account or by way of overdraft was now, with the amending addition of S1 within the meaning of services.COA held that opening bank account and obtaining credit card is also a service. Understanding that the benefit has been or will be paid for. For there to be an offence they have to be shown that they were a benefit which had been or would be paid for. ‘Sofroniou’. D opened 2 bank accounts under false names, and then arranged for loans in both accounts causing account to become overdrawn. He then applied for store credit and exceeded limit. Convicted of S1 theft act 1978. Understanding of the payment Mens rea – Dishonesty, deception was made intentionally or recklessly – Dishonest – The Ghosh Test (1982) – Leading case on dishonesty.Ghosh a doctor, (a locum consultant) at hospital. He claimed fees for operations he had n ot carried out. COA decided dishonestly has both objective and subjective element. †¢ Was the action dishonest according to the ordinary standards of reasonable & honest people? O †¢ Did the defendant realise that what he was doing was dishonest by those standards? S Here the jury would start was the objective test, if it was proved to be dishonest it was carried to the subjective test, however if it was not dishonest he would be acquitted. – Makes the deception deliberately or to be reckless as to whether they are deceiving othersEvasion of Liability is under S2 if the Theft act 1978, it creates a number ways that evasion of liability can be committed2(1) (a) dishonestly secures the remission of the whole or part of any existing liability to make a payment, whether his own liability or another's; or 2(1) (b) with intent to make permanent default in whole or in part on any existing liability to make a payment, or with intent to let another do so, dishonestly induces the creditor or any person claiming payment on behalf of the creditor to wait for payment (whether or not the due date for payment is deferred) or to forgo payment; or 2(1) (c) dishonestly obtains any exemption from or abatement of liability to make a payment; shall be guilty of an offence. The liability is limited to legally enforceable liability Securing remissions of a liability – E. g. persuades creditor to let him off repaying all or part of debt, through untrue stories and deception. Jackson’ D paid for petrol using a stolen credit card, it was decided that he had an existing liability to pay for it by deception through the stolen credit card Inducing a creditor to wait or forgo payment, with (a) There must be an existing liability, but for (b) this offence it is enough if the defendant induces the creditor to wait for payment or forgo payment, the defendant must intend to make a permanent default. ‘Holt and lee’ – Two defendants had a meal i n a pizza restaurant, after they finished they made a plan to tell their waitress they had already made payment to another member of staff, so they could leave without paying. This was heard by an off duty police officer and they were arrested for attempting to induce a creditor to forgo payment. Turner’ (1974) – Defendant owed money for some work done, but the defendant said he had no ready cash and persuaded creditor to accept a cheque which he knew would not be met. Intent Obtaining an exemption from or an abatement of liability – Covers many everyday situations. E. g. People use invalid tickets or claim discounts that they are not entitled to. Leading case’ Sibartie’(1983) Defendant was a law student, bought two season tickets for daily journey, one ticket covering the beginning of his journey and the other ticket covering the end of his journey on; in between were 14 stations including an interchange station which had no valid ticked.At the in terchange station passing a ticket inspector, the appellant flashed ticked so fast so that she could not see what was on it. He with evasion of a liability by deception, contrary to section 2(1) (c) of the Theft Act 1978. ‘Firth 1990)’ – Doctor who failed to inform the NHS hospital, that some patients were private, he avoided paying charged to the hospital. Mens rea [pic]As well as proving deception, it must be shown that a person was deceived evaded liability as a result of deception. Common in all deception offences. Deception is not relevant to the person to whom it is made. ‘Laverty’. D changed number plates and chassis of car and sold to plaintiff. Not deception as plaintiff thought he was owner and no proof of deception. Etim v Hatfield’ D produced false declaration to PO clerk that he was entitled to supplementary benefits. Clerk gave him ? 10. 60. Without deception no payment would be given. Machines, not possible for deception to happ en, however it may be charged as theft. Deception after obtaining is not deception. ‘Collis-Smith’ D filled car up with petrol and claimed that his company would pay for his petrol. Ownership of petrol passed to him. Led to new law of the theft act 1978 under, S2. [pic] It must be proved in all deception offences. The Ghosh Test (1982) – Leading case on dishonesty. Ghosh a doctor, (a locum consultant) at hospital. He claimed fees for operations he had not carried out.COA decided dishonestly has both objective and subjective element. †¢ Was the action dishonest according to the ordinary standards of reasonable & honest people? Objective †¢ Did the defendant realise that what he was doing was dishonest by those standards? Subjective Here the jury would start was the objective test, if it was proved to be dishonest it was carried to the subjective test, however if it was not dishonest he would be acquitted. – Intention to permanently deprive, S15 (3 ) states that S6 shall apply to this offence, the word ‘‘appropriation’ is changed to ‘obtaining. ‘ – Makes the deception deliberately or to be reckless as to whether they are deceiving othersMaking off without payment, is defined under S3 (1) of the Theft Act 1978, it provides ‘a person who, knowing that payment on the spot for any goods supplied or service done is required or expected from him, dishonestly makes off without having paid as required or expected and with intent to avoid payment of the amount due shall be guilty of an offence. ’ The goods supplied or service must be lawful, if not there is no offence. This offence was created as the Theft act 1968 had many loop holes which meant many defendants were getting off not guilty even if defendants conduct seen by many as ‘criminal’. One gap was seen in the case ‘Greenburg’ (1972) – D filled car up at garage and driven off without paying, not guilty as moment petrol was appropriated it belonged to him. Payment on the spot’ includes payment at the time of collecting goods on which work has been done or in respect of which service has been provided. Needs to be proved that POTS was required or expected. ‘Vincent’ (2001) – D stayed at two hotels and left without fully paying his bills, having persuaded both hotel owners, by deception, to postpone payment, so POTS was not required. The COA quashed his conviction under S3, because the hoteliers had agreed to postpone payment, which meant that the actus Reus had not been committed. Makes off – The defendant must make off for the spot that payment is required ‘McDavitt’- D refused to pay a bill after an argument with the manager. D walked towards the door but was told the police were called. D went to the toilet and remained there.Directed jury to acquit the defendant, as he had not made off without payment. ‘Brooks & Brooksà ¢â‚¬â„¢, D1 ran out of a rear door and D2 was caught having walked out of a restaurant. ‘The spot’ was treated as being cash register ‘the spot where payment is required. ’ Mens Rea – Dishonesty (Same as theft) -The Ghosh Test (1982) – Leading case on dishonesty. Ghosh a doctor, (a locum consultant) at hospital. He claimed fees for operations he had not carried out. COA decided dishonestly has both objective and subjective element. †¢ Was the action dishonest according to the ordinary standards of reasonable & honest people? Objective †¢ Did the defendant realise that what he was doing was dishonest by those standards? SubjectiveHere the jury would start was the objective test, if it was proved to be dishonest it was carried to the subjective test, however if it was not dishonest he would be acquitted. Knowledge that payment on the spot is required. It must be established that the defendant knew payment was required or expected of hi m. Examples are restaurants where bill paid before leaving. Intention to avoid payment ‘with intent to avoid payment for the amount due ‘Allen (1985)’ HOL stated there must be an intent permanently to avoid payment. D left hotel without payment of ? 1,286, leaving behind his belongings. He phoned later to say he would pay as soon as he received sufficient money and arranged to collect his belongings and leave his passport as security.Basic criminal damage is set out in S1 (1) of the criminal damage act 1971 where it provides that ‘A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence. ’ Actus Reus – This phrase is not defined in the act, however old cases have stated that slight damage was sufficient to prove damage. ‘Gayford v Chouler’- Tra mpling down grass, no longer binding but a persuasive precedent. ? ‘Roe v Kingerlee’ – Smearing excrement on walls of a police cell; it cost ? 6 to clean up. ‘Matter of fact and degree,’ damage even if not permanent. ‘Hardman’ – Painting on pavements, removed with jets. None permanent ? ‘Blake v DPP’ – Biblical quotation on a concrete pillar, cost to clean, so held as damage ? ‘Samuel v Stubbs’ – Denting a policeman’s hat, causing a â€Å"temporary functional derangement† ? ‘A v R’ – D spat on policeman shirt, minimal effort to remove, therefore no damage. ? ‘Morphitis v Solmon’ – Scratch on scaffolding pole, doesn’t affect its usefulness or integrity. Defined in S10 (1) of criminal damage act 1971, ‘property’ means pr of a tangible nature, whether real or personal, including money and land; tamed wild creatures (or th eir carcasses); but not including wild mushrooms, fruit or foliage. Not intangibleBelonging to another is defined in S10 (2), provides that property belongs to any person having: custody or control of it; any proprietary right or interest; or a charge on it. Cannot be guilty of damaging or destroying own property. ? ‘Smith 1974’, D removed some electrical wiring . Not guilty, lacked mens rea. Mens Reus – ‘Pembliton (1874) – D threw stone at men who were fighting, missed and broke window. No intention even if he had intent to throw stone. No charge. – ‘Smith 1974’, Believed he was damaging own property. ‘Honest belief, negatives the mens rea. ’ ‘Stephenson (1979) D was tramp sheltering in a hay stack, lit a fire †¦ costs in damages.Would have been guilty if he was not schizophrenic, he didn’t realise the risk. Caldwell (1981), the HOL changed the law. Reckless – created an obvious risk to prope rty†¦.. It was used up to 2003. Gemmell and Richards reinstated the subjected test for recklessness. The two young defendants went camping without their parents' permission. During the night they entered the back yard of a shop and set fire to some bundles of they found and threw some it under a large plastic wheelie-bin and left. The fire spread and caused approximately ? 1m worth of damage. The defendants stated they thought it would extinguish itself because of the concrete, could not be charged as they didn’t realise the risk. 5 (2) (a) – D believed that the owner had consented or would have consented to destruction or damage. S5(2)(b) – D did it to protect some other property which he believed was in immediate need of protection and the means of protection were reasonable having regard to all the circumstances. (a) ‘Denton’, Thought employer had encouraged him to set fire to mill to make insurance claim. (B)’Hunt’ helped wife in duty as deputy warden in block of flats. Set fire to bedding to show alarms didn’t work. Conviction upheld as not for protection. (b)Conviction upheld – Baker and Williams, only for immediate danger. (Endangering Life) Aggravated criminal Damage is under S1 (2) of Criminal damage act (1971). A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another – (a) intending to destroy or damage any property or being reckless as to whether any property would be destroyed or damaged; and (b) intending by the destruction or damage to endanger the life of another or being reckless as to whether the life of another would be thereby endangered; shall be guilty of an offence. ’. Much more serious than basic, carries life sentence. The danger must come from the destruction/damage. ’ Steer (1987) – D fired 3 shots at the window of ex business partner, causing damage. Not guilty danger from shots. ‘We bster – D pushed large stone from bridge on to train, caused damage & showered passengers with debris, based on Recklessness. ‘Warwick’ – D rammed s police car and threw brick at it, causing damage and showered the officer with broken glass.Aggravated criminal damage the life doesn’t have to be endangered. ‘Sangha’ D set fire to mattress & 2 chairs in neighbours flat, however flat was empty and no one was at risk. Realised risk he would be guilty even if no actual risk. ‘Merrick’ – Employed to removed cables, life live wire out for 6 minutes, no one was hurt, but charged, if it was owner he would also be guilty. Mens Rea Intention or Recklessness as to destroying or damaging any property; and Intention or reckless as to whether the life is endangered by the destruction or damage. (Same meaning as basic offence). The prosecution must prove that the defendant was both aware of risk and danger.R( Stephen Malcolm) d was 15 years old, with friends thrown milk bottles filled with petrol at the outside of neighbour flat. This caused sheets of flame across window, thus endangering the lives of occupants, guilty. Arson – Under s1 (3) of the criminal damage act 1971, ‘an offence committed under this section by destroying or damaging property by fire shall be charged as arson. ’ the maximum penalty if life imprisonment. The basic offence of criminal damage must contain destruction through fire, thus the rest is the same. Aggravated Arson – Prosecution must prove that the defendant intended or was reckless as to whether life was endangered by the damage or destruction by fire. ‘Miller’ HOL held that arson can be committed through omission.

Book Review on the Godfather by Mario Puzo

Submitted by Md. Jane Alam Sufian Assistant Director 29th BCS (Ansar) Ansar & VDP Academy Shafipur, Gazipur Book Review On The Godfather By Mario Puzo Submitted To: Hira Miah Course OIC Director (Training) Ansar & VDP Academy Shafipur, Gazipur Submitted by Md. Jane Alam Sufian Assistant Director 29th BCS (Ansar) Ansar & VDP Academy Shafipur, Gazipur Acknowledgement Book review is an important assignment for an officer. For the successful accomplishment all credits and praises are due to Almighty, the most merciful the most gracious Allah.To complete this very work I had to seek guidance and help from lot of persons who helped me without any hesitation, I am really grateful to them for their patience.. I had to take notes from the internet in this case I have used wikipedia as reference and As I had submitted the book name by Mario Puzo and it wasn’t available in our library so I had to collect this book from Nilkhet, Dhaka. I would like to express my sincerest and deepest resp ect to my course OIC Hira Miah, Director (Training) Bangladesh Ansar & VDP Academy and CC Deputy Director Kamrun Nahar Bangladesh Ansar & VDP Academy.Finally I would like to express my deepest sense of gratitude and heartfelt thanks to my course mates. Introduction The Godfather is a crime novel written by Italian American author Mario Puzo, originally published in 1969 by G. P. Putnam's Sons. It details the story of a fictitious Sicilian Mafia family based in New York City (and Long Beach, New York) and headed by Don Vito Corleone, who became synonymous with the Italian Mafia. The novel covers the years 1945 to 1955, and also provides the back story of Vito Corleone from early childhood to adulthood.The book introduced Italian criminal terms like consiglieri, caporegime, Cosa Nostra, and omerta to an English-speaking audience. It formed the basis for a 1972 film of the same name. Two film sequels, including new contributions by Puzo himself, were made in 1974 and 1990. The first an d second films are widely considered to be two of the greatest films of all time. The cover was created by S. Neil Fujita whose design featured a large Gothic-style letter â€Å"G† with a long curl at the top emphasizing the first three letters of the title, accompanied by the hands of a puppeteer holding a set of strings over the â€Å"father† portion of the word.Title Some controversy surrounds the title of the book and its underworld implications. Although it is widely reported that Puzo was inspired to use â€Å"Godfather† as a designator for a Mafia leader from his experience as a reporter, the term The Godfather was first used in connection with the Mafia during Joe Valachi's testimony during a 1963 United States congressional hearing on organized crime. Main characters The Corleone family patriarch is Vito Corleone (The Don), whose surname (Italian for â€Å"Lionheart†) recalls the town of Corleone, Sicily.Vito has four children: Santino â€Å"Son ny† Corleone, Frederico â€Å"Fredo† Corleone, Michael â€Å"Mikey† Corleone, and Constanzia â€Å"Connie† Corleone. He also has an informally adopted son, Tom Hagen, who became the Corleones' consiglieri. Vito Corleone is also the godfather of singer and movie star Johnny Fontane. The godfather referred to in the title is generally taken to be Vito. However, the story's central character is actually Michael. Its central theme follows that it is Michael's destiny to replace his father as the head of the family, despite his determination to lead a more Americanized life with his girlfriend (and eventual wife) Kay Adams.The Corleone family is in fact a criminal organization with national influence, notably protection, extortion, gambling and union racketeering. Serving under the Don is his oldest son Santino, who serves as underboss. The operational side of the organization is headed by two caporegimes, Peter Clemenza and Salvatore Tessio. Film adaptation Ma in article: The Godfather In 1972, a film adaptation of the novel was released, starring Marlon Brando as Don Vito Corleone, Al Pacino as Michael Corleone, and directed by Francis Ford Coppola.Mario Puzo assisted with writing the screenplay and with other production tasks. The film grossed approximately $269 million worldwide and won various awards, including three Academy Awards, five Golden Globes and one Grammy and is considered to be one of the greatest films of all time. The sequel, The Godfather Part II won six Oscars, and became the first sequel to win the Academy Award for Best Picture. The film is similar to the novel in most places, but leaves out some details, such as extended back stories for some characters. Some of these details ere actually filmed, and were included in later versions such as The Godfather Saga. A subplot involving Johnny Fontane in Hollywood was not filmed. The biggest difference was that the novel included a more upbeat ending than the film, in which Kay Corleone accepts Michael's decision to take over his father's business. The film, in contrast, ends with Kay's realization of Michael's ruthlessness, a theme that would develop in the second and third films, which were largely not based on the original novel. Vito Corleone's backstory appeared in the second film.Other adaptations Main article: The Godfather: The Game The video game company Electronic Arts released a video game adaptation of The Godfather on March 21, 2006. The player assumes the role of a â€Å"soldier† in the Corleone family. Prior to his death, Marlon Brando provided some voice work for Vito, which was eventually deemed unusable and was dubbed over by a Brando impersonator. Francis Ford Coppola said in April 2005 that he was not informed of Paramount's decision to allow the game to be made and he did not approve of it. 4] Al Pacino also did not participate, and his likeness was replaced with a different depiction of Michael Corleone. Sequels In 1983 Pu zo's literary sequel to The Godfather was published. Entitled The Sicilian it chronicles the life of â€Å"Guiliano† (Salvatore Giuliano) but the Corleone family is featured heavily throughout, Michael Corleone in particular. Chronologically this story sits between Michael's exile to Sicily in 1950 to his return to the USA. Due to copyright reasons the Corleone family involvement was cut from the Michael Cimino movie adaption.In 2004, Random House published a sequel to Puzo's The Godfather, The Godfather Returns, by Mark Winegardner. A further sequel by Winegardner, The Godfather's Revenge, was released in 2006. The sequel novels continue the story from Puzo's novel. The Godfather Returns picks up the story immediately after the end of Puzo's The Godfather. It covers the years 1955 to 1962, as well as providing significant backstory for Michael Corleone's character prior to the events of the first novel. The events of the film The Godfather Part II all take place within the t ime frame of this novel, but are only mentioned in the background.The novel contains an appendix that attempts to correlate the events of the novels with the events of the films. The Godfather's Revenge covers the years 1963 to 1964. Continuing Puzo's habit, as seen in The Godfather, of featuring characters who are close analogues of real life events and public figures (as Johnny Fontane is an analogue of Frank Sinatra), Winegardner features in his two Godfather novels analogues of Joseph, John, and Robert Kennedy, as well as an analogue for alleged organized crime figure Carlos Marcello (Carlo Tramonti).In The Godfather Returns, Winegardner also dramatizes the sweep of organized crime arrests that took place in Apalachin, New York, in 1957. Winegardner uses all of the characters from the Puzo novels, and created a few of his own, most notably Nick Geraci, a Corleone soldier who plays a pivotal role in the sequel novels. Winegardner further develops characters from the original nove l, such as Fredo Corleone, Tom Hagen, and Johnny Fontane. Real-life influencesLarge parts of the novel are based upon reality, notably the history of the so-called ‘Five Families', the Mafia-organization in New York and the surrounding area. The novel also includes many allusions to real-life mobsters and their associates, and Johnny Fontane is based on Frank Sinatra, Moe Greene on Bugsy Siegel, for example. Summary Ageless Books are boldly ignorant of the passage of time. The past and the future merge in the permanence of a timeless story. Years and decades pass us by, we grow up and grow old, and yet these books only become more enduring with time.The Godfather story is insurmountable, it is beyond a classic, it is unashamedly ignorant of cultural, geographical or age boundaries – it resonates with all of us and has so ever since it first appeared in print in Mario Puzo‘s epic novel in 1969. Nino Rota‘s world famous main theme song is etched in the depth o f my memory from my childhood days when the music filled my house in London. the Godfather has held a special place in my heart all my life. I knew the music many years before I watched the movie first, and that came many years before I read the novel.Now, and only now, after reading the novel do I understand why everyone loved this story so much and why they repeatedly watched and listened to the music. Now I feel closer to one of my friend Razib and marvel at his taste in what I find to be a remarkable story. How I wish he could be here today to tell me his thoughts on the Godfather, now that I can appreciate it. We may express the gratitude we feel toward our families while we have the chance, but why is it that the true understanding of that gratitude often greets us bitterly late in life?The ingenuous story and remarkable characters aside, the writing of Mario Puzo is of highest quality. Puzo’s novel speaks to every reader from every walk of life, and evidently through d ifferent generations. It runs through themes understood by all humans: family and brotherhood, sacrifice and justice, trust and betrayal, revenge and retribution, business and friendship – friendship that the Godfather held so tenderly and seriously, friendship that he offered openly and generously, friendship in the name of which he offered favors and collected them in due time.In the core of this magnificent story is Mario Puzo’s writing. On the surface, it mostly appears to be a crime novel with grotesque scenes and unhappy outcomes but it is only the surface. The writing is solid, authentic, lustful and obsessive through and through – it takes your imagination into the scene, it places you inside the situation with the character and it demands that you fully partake in the intensity of every moment. The story endures and the writing of this remarkable author is the solid foundation of support which upholds t. â€Å"Amerigo Bonasera sat in New York Court Num ber 3 and waited for justice†¦. † And so we enter the under world of Italian immigrants in New York city. We encounter characters we can never forget. The depiction of these unforgettable characters – Luca Brasi, Tom Hagen, Sonny Corleone, Kay Adams, Johnny Fontaine – while secondary to our main characters, paints a permanent picture before our eyes in the hands of Mario Puzo’s masterful prose.Through these characters, we get to know our heroes, Don Vito Corleone as the head of the Corleone family and business, and the mastermind of the ingenious mafia world, and Michael Corleone, the Don’s favorite son, who refuses to follow in his father’s footsteps, joins the army and keeps a distance from the family, until one day in the deep countryside of Sicily, he meets his ultimate fate. Perhaps, in its essence, in its very core, the Godfather is a story about father and son and their undeniable bond, which can be weakened but not broken, in the company of family loyalty and devotion reciprocating that of the Corleone family. I will reason with him. † – Don Corleone’s famous motto, a phrase that, when used, immediately translated to Tom Hagen, his consigliere, that the Godfather will not be persuaded otherwise, and that it would be in the best interest of the opposing party to acquiesce to Godfather’s terms because no matter what terms presented to them at this time, if they should fail to agree, it would most certainly be subject to harsher circumstances. Don Corleone is not a criminal man in his own world. He is a gracious, reasonable and honorable man.He has earned the respect of his family, his community, his workforce, the entire immigrant population from Italy, and all who know him through his distinguished reputation. When he first came to America, for the young Vito, this was the dream land of opportunity at a time when jobs were scarce in Sicily and the government was to be feared and no t trusted. He wore out his welcome quickly in America. He soon realized that the government and the authorities do not exist to protect him, to grant him justice in the face of adversity and to act in his best interest.They exist to protect the law, which often is lacking in reason and circumstantial exceptions. The young Vito’s turning point in life comes to him in the early days in America, when recently armed with this bitter knowledge, he had to protect himself against the corrupt and feared Fanucci in New York’s Hell’s Kitchen. Vito Corleone makes the simple, logical, ingenious decision on the fate of Fanucci, and subsequently the fate of all those families and businesses from whom Fanucci extorted money for nothing in return. That marks the day when he realizes his own fate in life.He begins to believe that every man has one fate, something Michael always remembers about his father but does not fully comprehend until his hideout in Sicily later. The obsess ion and the reverence of the Godfather is stunning and undeniable. He is worshiped on a massive scale, and yet by society’s measures, he is a first rate criminal. Even as he commits the most heinous crime in all of the story, that of beheading of Khartoum, the magnificent horse belonging to Hollywood hotshot Woltz and the symbol of all beauty and innocence, the Godfather stands tall and respected.It is all understood and forgiven him as part of the business, necessary to reach certain goals and to protect certain interests. It is the legendary Marlon Brando performance engraved into a rock in our memory – standing erect and powerful, commanding his world and bringing justice where none can be achieved by society’s standard measures. The ethics of Don Corleone come to surface as he is first approached by Sollozzo, the â€Å"Turk† about the drug business. It makes perfect sense to get engaged in trafficking drugs as a guaranteed measure to long-term power a nd money.Tom Hagen lays it down clearly: If we do not get into it, someone else will. If it is not a main stream of income in the families now, it will be in 5 years, 10 years down the road. We must act quick, Tom tells the Godfather. Sonny, with his short and quick temper, makes a fatal mistake during the course of these negotiations by disagreeing with his father during the meeting with Sollozzo – words that have no doubt made a proud mark on the American pop culture when the Godfather tells him never to let anyone outside the family know what you think.Yet despite the advice of his consigliere and his most likely successor, Sonny, the Godfather stands strong if alone in refusing to engage in drug business on ethics and brilliant business vision. This decision along with Sonny’s foolishness to speak up at the Sollozzo meeting costs the Godfather 6 bullets. Even so, these bullets do not even come close to matching the merciless gunning down of Sonny that later follows . These harsh blows to the most powerful man in all of NYC at the time raise intensity among the mafia world, and yet the Don refuses to act on this with justified vengeance.It is with unwavering belief and rock-solid ethics that the Godfather then delivers a most unforgettable speech to the five Italian families in hopes of truce on the drug business. The judges and senators that hold his friendship dear would no longer wish to be associated with him if the business graduated from the small petty crimes around importing and exporting of olive oil and other goods, gambling, prostitution – a favorite of Tattalias – to a seriously debilitating substance.In all of this, he stands alone as visionaries often do. When all hell broke loose after Godfather’s shooting and his hospitalization, it took a mastermind planning session between Clemenza, Tom Hagen and Sonny and Michael to arrive at the perfect solution. It was risky but the only way to handle the situation and it was for Michael to kill the slimy NY cop, McClusky, and the head of drug business, Sollozzo, in a public restaurant. Michael flees overnight to a hideout in Sicily, and waits for the smoke to clear to come home.It takes almost three years before he is able to safely return home – during which time the Godfather tells Hagen every day â€Å"Remember to use all your wits for a plan to bring Michael home. † But it takes the genius of the Godfather’s sharp mind, even in his weakened condition, to find the only legitimate way to realize this – and that brings us to the story of Felix Bocchichio. This was omitted from the first movie but brilliantly told in the book. The Bocchichio family are the primitive borderline hostile generation who would take revenge – an eye for an eye – if anything were to happen to their clan.For that reason, having a Bocchichio hostage or having one arrange a meeting is absolute insurance on the impartial validity of the matter. And it is through a misfortune of the Bocchichio family that Michael is able to return home. When Felix Bocchichio has his wake-up call after the ruthless way in which his colleagues betray him, he has to pay for a crime he did not commit. After he served his term and was released, he shoots his enemies dead in broad daylight, and waits to be arrested. It is impossible to find a way out of this mess for Felix Bocchichio.The genius of Godfather arranges for Felix to confess to the murder of McCLusky and Sollozzo, for an exchange of large pension to his family for life. Felix confesses and Michael comes home at long last. The recurring theme of taking care of one’s family in exchange for a ‘favor’ to the Godfather is renewed at the turn of every page in this book. Some of the sub-plots running through the Godfather, non-central to the overall theme and missing from the movie, still make up my most cherished parts of this genius story.The indelible, lus tful, raw passion which Lucy Mancini and Sonny enjoy for a short while is on top of that list. Even the sweet brief romance of Michael Corleone and his first wife, the Italian bella Apollonia, deliciously described as it was, pales in comparison to the passages imparting the details of Sonny’s wild affair with Lucy. Mario Puzo proves no less a gifted author in his creation of the erotic love scenes between the impassioned lovers. The love making is predatory as Lucy and Sonny devour one another with voracious appetite.When Sonny dies, Lucy’s whole physical being aches for him, a loss and a wound that Sonny’s wife is far from experiencing. With the move to Vegas, thanks to Hagan’s arrangements to take care of â€Å"extended† relations of Sonny, Lucy embarks on a new life and adventures, including the nature of her relationship with Jules. Large or small, Puzo takes the time to first develop his characters fully – even if in isolation of other s – and then to carefully weave each into the central plot. There is a reason and time for each character to play their part, pay their dues, return a favor, or bestow an act of friendship to the Godfather.The Don, the mastermind of Mario Puzo’s creation, is the only one who knows well in advance of others – and that includes the reader – how and when each chosen one will be called to action. From the wide spectrum of the compelling personalities at his finger tips, Mario Puzo affords way too much time to developing that of the wasteful, whiny, incapable Johnny Fontaine, the Godfather’s Godson. If there is a more insufferable type in all of the Godfather, I must have missed the chapter – because Johnny Fontaine is it for me. To my disappointment, we delve into Johnny and peel layer after layer into his life, his career, and his psyche.The irony surrounding the deep love the Godfather feels for Johnny is blatant. He makes heaps of mistakes, b ut he also destroys the one singular value held of highest regards in the eyes of Don Corleone, that of family: He divorces and abandons his Italian wife and family in his drunken and desperate stupor of dealing with fame. Still the Don continues to love and support his Godson unconditionally. It is for the undeserving Johnny Fontaine that Jack Woltz pays dearly in the beheading of Khartoum, the finest, priciest, and rarest racehorse in the world.All of this sacrifice for the sacred bond of the Godfather to Godson relationship – one held very high in the eye of a Sicilian man – a bond for which the Godfather murders and destroys anything and anyone in order to protect. A sacred bond ever so wasted on a man such as Johnny Fontaine. Conclusion As a novelist and a masterful story-teller, Mario Puzo is gripping in every passage, every chapter and every book (total of 9 books in The Godfather). Movies 1 and 2 are no doubt classics of our time, and tightly capture the essenc e of the novel.Timeless movies as they be, with unforgettable theme music to pull us in even deeper into the elusive ways of the Italian mafia underworld, it is the writing that I prefer. It is in the riveting passages of Mario Puzo’s original book that his characters come alive in more riveting shapes and colors, although I admit that it is impossible not to associate them with the actors that have burned those names into our memories since the original Godfather movie. The Godfather is a masterpiece and a classic, and a story that once read and consumed, leaves its readers and viewers changed permanently.About the author Mario Puzo Mario Gianluigi Puzo (October 15, 1920 – July 2, 1999) was an American author and screenwriter, known for his novels about the Mafia, including The Godfather (1969), which he later co-adapted into a film by Francis Ford Coppola. He won the Academy Award for Best Adapted Screenplay in both 1972, and 1974. Puzo was born into a poor family fr om Pietradefusi, Province of Avellino, Campania, Italy living in the Hell's Kitchen neighborhood of New York. [1] Many of his books draw heavily on this heritage.After graduating from the City College of New York, he joined the United States Army Air Forces in World War II. Due to his poor eyesight, the military did not let him undertake combat duties but made him a public relations officer stationed in Germany. In 1950, his first short story, The Last Christmas, was published in American Vanguard. After the war, he wrote his first book, The Dark Arena, which was published in 1955. At periods in the 1950s and early 1960s, Puzo worked as a writer/editor for publisher Martin Goodman's Magazine Management Company.Puzo, along with other writers like Bruce Jay Friedman, worked for the company line of men's magazines, pulp titles like Male, True Action, and Swank. Under the pseudonym Mario Cleri, Puzo wrote World War II adventure features for True Action. Puzo's most famous work, The Godf ather, was first published in 1969 after he had heard anecdotes about Mafia organizations during his time in pulp journalism. He later said in an interview with Larry King that his principal motivation was to make money. He had already, after all, written two books that had received great reviews, yet had not amounted to much.As a government clerk with five children, he was looking to write something that would appeal to the masses. With a number one bestseller for months on the New York Times Best Seller List, Mario Puzo had found his target audience. The book was later developed into the film The Godfather, directed by Francis Ford Coppola. The movie received 11 Academy Award nominations, winning three, including an Oscar for Puzo for Best Adapted Screenplay. Coppola and Puzo collaborated then to work on sequels to the original film, The Godfather Part II and The Godfather Part III.Puzo wrote the first draft of the script for the 1974 disaster film Earthquake, which he was unable to continue working on due to his commitment to The Godfather Part II. Puzo also co-wrote Richard Donner's Superman and the original draft for Superman II. He also collaborated on the stories for the 1982 film A Time to Die and the 1984 Francis Ford Coppola film The Cotton Club. Puzo never saw the publication of his penultimate book, Omerta, but the manuscript was finished before his death as was the manuscript for The Family.However, in a review originally published in the San Francisco Chronicle, Jules Siegel, who had worked closely with Puzo at Magazine Management Company, speculated that Omerta may have been completed by â€Å"some talentless hack. † Siegel also acknowledges the temptation to â€Å"rationalize avoiding what is probably the correct analysis – that [Puzo] wrote it and it is terrible. † Puzo died of heart failure on Friday, July 2, 1999 at his home in Bay Shore, Long Island, New York. His family now lives in East Islip, New York. Works of PuzoN ovels †¢The Dark Arena (1955) †¢The Fortunate Pilgrim (1965) †¢The Runaway Summer of Davie Shaw (1966) †¢Six Graves to Munich (1967), as Mario Cleri †¢The Godfather (1969) †¢Fools Die (1978) †¢The Sicilian (1984) †¢The Fourth K (1991) †¢The Last Don (1996) †¢Omerta (2000) †¢The Family (2001) (completed by Puzo's girlfriend Carol Gino) Non-fiction †¢Ã¢â‚¬ Test Yourself: Are You Heading for a Nervous Breakdown? † as by Mario Cleri (1965) †¢The Godfather Papers and Other Confessions (1972) †¢Inside Las Vegas (1977) Short stories †¢Ã¢â‚¬ The Last Christmas† (1950) â€Å"John ‘Red' Marston's Island of Delight† as by Mario Cleri (1964) †¢Ã¢â‚¬ Big Mike's Wild Young Sister-in-law† as by Mario Cleri (1964) †¢Ã¢â‚¬ The Six Million Killer Sharks That Terrorize Our Shores† as by Mario Cleri (1966) †¢Ã¢â‚¬ The Unkillable Six† as by Mario Cleri (1967) †¢Ã ¢â‚¬ Girls of Pleasure Penthouse† as by Mario Cleri (1968) †¢Ã¢â‚¬ Order Lucy For Tonight† as by Mario Cleri (1968) †¢Ã¢â‚¬ 12 Barracks of Wild Blondes† as Mario Cleri (1968) Screenplays †¢The Godfather (1972) †¢The Godfather Part II (1974) †¢Earthquake (1974) †¢Superman (1978) †¢Superman II (1980) †¢The Godfather Part III (1990) †¢Christopher Columbus: The Discovery (1992)Summary:The book opens with the wedding of Connie Corleone, daughter of Don Vito ‘The Godfather' Corleone, head of the most powerful of the five great Mafia clans or ‘families' of New York. Don Corleone is shot at by a new contender for power in the city, Virgil ‘the Turk' Solozzo, who plans to obtain power by the lure of vast profits in the drug trafficking trade. After the Don is incapacitated by his assassination attempt, the book follows the Corleone family's progress as they must now adapt to the changing times and power dynam ics and maintain the Corleone empire.Santino ‘Sonny' Corleone is too blunt and brash a man to ever become Don while Freddie is weak and ineffective. The book follows the journey and transformation of the youngest, and hitherto the Don's most distant, son Michael as he realizes that though he may have tried to live by society's norms, rejecting what his father represented, inside lives a true Sicilian who will stop at nothing to get what he wants and protect those he loves. Michael has a tough task ahead of him, he has to locate his father's would-be assassin, crush the rival gangs and regain once more the respect that the name Corleone inspired in New York†¦

Binary Phase Shift Keying BPSK Modulation Demodulation Computer Science Essay

Binary Phase Shift Keying BPSK Modulation Demodulation Computer Science Essay This experiment is based on the Binary Phase Shift Keying (BPSK) modulation/demodulation technique. The aim of the experiment is to gain familiarity with the components of a simple data transmission system, gain experience using an experimental communication system and studying its performance under the influence of white noise and also, to compare experimental results with theoretical deductions. Bandpass modulation, of which BPSK is a type, is a process whereby, a sinusoid usually called a carrier wave, is modulated or have its characteristics changed by a digital pulse baseband signal in other to enable wireless based transmission. In BPSK modulation, the phase of the carrier waveform is shifted to either 0Â ° or 180Â ° by the modulating data signal. To effectively model the transmission channel, the AWGN generator is used which adds the effect of noise to the signal at the receiver in other to properly characterise what obtains in real systems. SNR measurements are taken after the noise is added before the receiver and results of each stage of the experiment are presented. 2.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The results obtained from the experiment and brief discussions are now presented. 2.1 The frequency of the waveform was measured to be 1.493kHz 2.2 The amplitude of the waveform was measured to be 3.608V 2.3 C:Documents and SettingsAGEBNIGADesktopLAB RESULTSPart 2.bmp Fig. 1: Square Waveform from NE555 timer circuit. The timer circuit produces a sequence of ones and zeros which together with the resistors and capacitor, produces a square waveform. It can be observed that the square top and bottom are not perfectly straight but with ripples, this is due to the resonance effect presented by the capacitor. Also, the rising pattern of the top is due to the voltage rise time in the capacitor. 2.4 The frequency of the message sequence is measured to be 374Hz 2.5 C:Documents and SettingsAGEBNIGALocal SettingsTemporary Internet FilesContent.WordPart 4 5.bmp Fig. 2: M essage sequence at the output of the frequency divider. The SN74LS74 integrated circuit implements a second order frequency divider, 2n (n=2). Hence the frequency of the timer circuit is divided by four. Hence, this is also evident in the frequency of the message sequence in 2.4 above. 2.6 The cut-off frequency of the 2nd order Butterworth low pass filter is given by; The cut-off frequency is the frequency at which the magnitude of the transfer function drops to 0.7071 of its maximum value which represents the point at which the power in the circuit is 3dB less than the maximum value. 2.7 The frequency of the sinusoid at the output of the filter was measured to be 1.328kHz. 2.8 C:Documents and SettingsAGEBNIGALocal SettingsTemporary Internet FilesContent.Wordpart 8.jpg Fig. 3: Output of the first and second Butterworth LPF. A B A – Output of first filter; B – Output of second filter The Butterworth lowpass filter is used to generate the sinusoidal carrier required for the baseband signal. The Butterworth filter has a gentle roll-off, has no ripple in the pass or stop band hence, it has a monotonic response. To maximise the smoothness of the sinusoid, we use two of such filters in series.

Michael Lemonick's Are We Losing Our Edge Essay

Michael Lemonick's Are We Losing Our Edge - Essay Example Thus, through such competition, any country that has even a little bit of ambition and grit is being able to establish itself within the rest of the world as a global superpower in terms of its trade and economy. As per the words of Shirley Ann Jackson, America is thus facing what is called, a ‘Quiet Crisis.’ (Lemonick, Michael D.) Various kinds of aspects have together helped to stem the kind of growth that American was having in the last few decades, and compared to the current levels of growth, how the same has slowed down due to processes within the government framework and structure. For example, the author writes that during the period of George W Bush, a large amount of hostility was shown towards various topics under science, which were not given ample grants or potential for research and testing. This has further led to the growth of the meltdown that the country is facing on a global scale today. (Msurjapu) The inadequacies of growth going in America have been further highlighted by the kind of slow down that has been brought about in the corporate sector as well. These industries are not being given enough government support unlike other companies around the world in other countries are receiving; furthermore, they are cutting back on their investments and production for fear of going into losses and not being able to cover their initial and variable costs. According to personal opinion, the reign under Barack Obama has done far better in trying to perfect this global meltdown that America has been going through since the time of Bush. During his time, not much emphasis was given to various sectors that were at that time waiting to explode into fully potential fields of growth and development. Since areas like nanotechnology, supercomputing and alternative energy were not given as much importance in America at the time, other countries like India and Japan were trying their best to exploit these areas and emerge as victorious superpowers in the same. The final result was that these other countries had been successful in their operations and left America a step behind in terms of such development in the fields of science and technology. By the time it was time for Bush to step down and Obama to take control and fix these factors, other countries around the world had established their own levels of competition in the global market with respect to these full of potential growth aspects of life. That is why, America has been said to be losing out on its edge; the same edge that it held over the global market earlier, due to such intolerance towards research in newer fields. This has been taken up by other nations around the world now, leading to American being put into the competition at the same level, and not a cut above the rest; a position that the country used to maintain in the past. Lemonick has made use of a number of rhetorical strategies to write his article. These are strategies used in order to make the wri ting more powerful and persuasive for the reader, and help him understand a person’s point of view better. However, each piece and kind of writing requires a different kind of strategy to be used, and not all of them can be used within the same article. Lemonick has made excellent use of exemplification within his article. This includes providing facts and

Nature vs. nurture debate within the context of the biopsychosocial Essay

Nature vs. nurture debate within the context of the biopsychosocial approach using a pretend cloning scenario - Essay Example ’s life story is important in knowing to its full extent the story of how the illness started and how the social and psychological domains affect the patient. It integrates the social interactions of individuals mentally, physically and emotionally in conceptualizing decease and illness. It has also been presented that the infliction and gravity of pain depends on sub-aspects such as gender, race, ethnic origin and tradition (Frankel et.al., 2003). The biopsychosocial aspects are the factors which shape an individual, it provides an individual experience and knowledge. Because of this, an individual who was born and lived during the 1950’s will have different characteristics if that individual was born and lived during the 1970’s. This is because that individual would have a different environment due to change and development, and most experiences will be different from one point or the other. These are the reasons why in a biopsychosocial point of view, parents and nor child will not prosper (Levine, 2009). The issue of cloning is closely connected to the debate of nature versus nurture in terms of how the cloned organism lives. Scientists speculate that cloned organisms will have more or less the same characteristics as its parents (Levine, 2009). This is because the genes and DNA structure of the cloned individual have the same structure as the parent of the clone. This is the nature aspect of the issue. On the other hand, it is also important to look into the nurture aspect which defines the environmental and social influences that impacts the life of the cloned individual. Yes, the cloned individual may have the same physical and biological attributes as the parent clone, but it may not have the same reaction to the present conditions wherein it will live because of the learning experience it will encounter. Although it has the same physical attributes as the parent clone, it may react differently to the situations around it because of the how it will

International communication and negotiation Term Paper

International communication and negotiation - Term Paper Example for negotiations through taking into consideration the kind of differences, which happen across these two different cultures, as well as pointing out likely pitfalls of lack of awareness to cultural factors. This two groups fall under Monochronic timers. The opt for prompt stars and ends to a meeting, they value breaks and deal with one item at a time (Weldon and Jehn 388). They depend on specific, exclusive and open communication and prefer to talk in sequence. Their main difference comes with the focus on the future, present or past. Americans tend to focus more on the present and near-future, but Indonesians strictly negotiate on long-term future goals (Adler 98). Also, there is space orientations when it comes to comparing the American and Indonesian culture. This has to do with territory, comfortable personal distance, division between public and private, comfort with physical touch and eye contact, as well as expectation concerning how and where contact will take place (Adler 98). It is an American etiquette that when you meet someone, do not stand too close to them as they deem it annoying to the other individual, thus maintain your physical distance. In Indonesia, women are alwa ys seeing holding hands with other women as they talk , but not men (Adler 102). Also, when it comes to eye contact, maintaining eye contact with an American is considered as sign of courage and assurance, but when it comes to Indonesians, looking down while talking to someone is considered as a sign of respect (Lederach 65). Furthermore, wondering your eyes from the person you are negotiating with in American is deemed as a sign of embarrassment or disagreement. American negotiators are more inclined to depend on personal values, imagining self, as well as others, as independent, autonomous and self-reliant (Graham 19). This does not imply that they do not consider consulting, but the likelihood to perceive self as separate instead of a member of a network or web means that more

The constructivist philosophy in the modern pedagogy Essay

The constructivist philosophy in the modern pedagogy - Essay Example Application Summary The following essay is focused on the constructivist philosophy and its significance in terms of contemporary education. The essay will review the constructivist philosophy and its complementary technology that has become popular in the modern pedagogy. The constructivist curriculum exemplifies futuristic and flexible technology tools. Web 2.0 tools strengthen the constructivist curriculum by providing it the most efficient technology tools to address cognitive needs of analyzing, interpretation and inquiry. This third wave is still undergoing a change, which may bring about more possibilities and more accomplishments in the field of education. This metacognitive philosophy will be utilized as an instrument of change for constructing a constructivist technology centered system. In order to provide an analysis of constructivist academic activities and make an evaluation of effective teaching technologies, statistics and research must be perused. This project will provide an analysis and evaluation through the author’s wiki page and power point presentation. The effectiveness of ineffectiveness of the constructivist educational activities can be shown through both modern means of technology. The author predicts a successful analysis of constructivist pedagogy. The evaluation of the analysis of constructivist pedagogy will be based on the author’s analysis. Hopefully, the evaluation will be successful, but the possibility of ineffectiveness will be considered.

Transformational Learning Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Transformational Learning - Essay Example The significant feature of power is that it is the function of Dependency. The greater the person is dependent on the first person; the greater is the first individual’s power in the relationship. Team work is vital in an organization. Triumphant teams accomplish the strategic goals if they are efficient. Teams are most successful when different group of workers are participating. Restricting the number of teams on which only one employee may contribute. Team has a habitual meeting schedule. A new employee is added to the team. Transformational leadership style situates eminent values for imitation. The encouraging inspiration gives the adherents with challenges along with a suggestion for appealing in joint purposes and accomplishments. Transactional leadership engrosses dependent support. Cohorts are aggravated by the manager’s assurance, admiration, and remuneration. Transformational Leaders are those who provide individualized consideration and intellectual stimulation and who possess charisma. They pay attention to the concerns and growth needs of individual followers, awareness of issues by helping them to look at old problems in new ways and they are able to motivate and inspire followers to put out additional effort to achieve group goals. Transactional leaders are those who guide or motivate their followers in the direction of established goals clarifying role and task requirements. These leaders encourage followers to rise above their own self interest for the good of the organization and who is capable of having a deep and astonishing effect on his or her followers. Organization culture is the common perception held by organizational associates, a system of shared meaning. This system is a set of key characteristics that the organization values. Transformational Leadership and organizational culture are supposed to be firmly entwined. The leaders should have a profound consideration of the distinctiveness as well as force of the

MUVES and the 21st Century Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

MUVES and the 21st Century - Essay Example In the same way, these have enhanced access to learning and business practices. Many people from different parts of the world have been enrolling in institutions abroad to enroll in distance learning courses through the e-learning portals and systems created by the institutions offering this kind of learning (Jarrett, 2008). In this, the benefits of technological advancements cannot be overemphasized in any way. It remains the responsibility of institutions and business organisations that want to take advantage of these developments to make approaches through which they can improve their social and business process through the use of these systems and others, which continue to be developed. Multi-User Virtual Environments, also known as MUVEs refers to the popular and well-known forms of multi-media based entertainments. However, in the recent past, these kinds of media have been receiving wide acceptance in various other disciplines, because of the ability to facilitate important practices when effectively used. For instance, in many places the attention of MUVEs seems to have changed drastically, to focus on the ability support learning activities in the education sector. In this regard, many research groups have been active in designing different kinds of MUVEs, while investigating their perceived effectiveness in delivering some of the set goals and objectives. These research processes have been offering various kinds of MUVEs in different formats in order to determine their ability to achieve the set goals and objectives in teaching and learning. It is expected that the ongoing research into the effectiveness of these technologies will play a leading role in influencing the various practices not only in the education sector, but also in other sectors and in this century. MUVEs that are designed for use in the wider educational community often have certain embedded problems and

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn Essay Example for Free

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn Essay The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has been labelled as a picaresque novel. A picaresque novel is an adventure story that involves an anti-hero or picaro who wanders around with no actual destination in mind. The picaresque novel has many key elements. It must contain an anti-hero who is usually described as an underling(subordinate) with no place in society, it is usually told in autobiographical form, and it is potentially endless, meaning that it has no tight plot, but could go on and on. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has moulded itself perfectly to all these essential elements of a picaresque novel. Huck Finn is undeniably the picaro, and the river is his method of travel, as well as the way in which he wanders around with no actual destination. This is due to the fact that the river is in control and not Huck. Furthermore, it is the picaresque style that has also aided in highlighting the escapades that Huck experiences through his travels as those crucial to the novel, but also crucial to such a character as Huckleberry Finn. Huck is the perfect example of a young boy with adventure on his mind, and thus the characterization of Huck as a picaro is done flawlessly. Additionally, as The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn contains all the vital aspects of a picaresque novel and picaro hero, it is these crucial traits that mark it as one of Mark Twains most successful novels, and one of the world’s most famous adventure stories. One of the most important aspects of the picaresque novel is the fact that it must contain a picaro, otherwise known as the anti-hero of the novel. Huck is obviously the picaro in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. A picaro is defined as, a low-born but clever individual who wanders into and out of various affairs of love, danger, and farcical intrigue. These involvements may take place at all social levels and typically present a humorous and wide-ranging satire of a given society (The Gale Group). Huck fits this definition perfectly. Huck isnt accepted by society and doesnt even want to be. He is most comfortable out on his own in the frontier. Furthermore, when the Widow Douglas takes him in and tries to provide him with a good life he doesnt want any part of it: â€Å"The Widow Douglas she took me for her son and allowed she would sivilize me; but it was rough living in the house all the time, considering how dismal regular and decent the widow was in all her ways, and so when I couldnt stand it no longer I lit out. I got into my old rags and my sugar-hogshead again, and was free and satisfied. † (194) Huck finds civilized life intolerable, but instead prefers to live the life of a free spirit, but he isnt able to do that when the Widow is trying to civilize him. The Widow wants to refine Hucks lifestyle to match hers, but Huck cant stand that type of life and resists it. Huck wants to keep his independence, and he believes that the frontier is the only place where he can do that. Therefore, Hucks unaccepted presence in society, and his unwillingness to fit in is one that proves his existence as a picaro in the picaresque novel. Another characteristic of the picaro is the fact that he is a wanderer, which means that he is the type of character who roams from place-to-place with no set destination in mind. Hucks wandering occurs within the form of his raft on the Mississippi river. The river is an important aspect of Hucks wandering because the river continuously changes course, and there is no way for Huck to direct the river and his raft. If Huck passes a place or location there is no way for him to turn the raft around, but instead he has to continue on down the river. An example of this is when Huck and Jim pass Cairo, which was the one specific destination they had in mind because its where Jim would have been free, It wouldnt do to take to the shore; we couldnt take the raft up the stream, of course. There warnt no way but to wait for dark and start back in the canoe and take the chances (314). In other words, the river basically has a life of its own, and therefore Huck and Jim have to abide by the river’s rules. Another important fact regarding the picaro as a wanderer is the notion that he will change as a result of his travels, the main character often grows intellectually and morally through his various encounters along the path of his journey (Bibliomania). Hucks character matures throughout the novel from that of a boy to one that can be seen as something closer to a man. Huck begins to have a conscience, which proves that he is beginning to mature because he begins to actually think about things, and care about them. Hucks maturation can be observed in the scene where he chooses to tell Mary Jane the truth about the two men posing as her uncles, I got to tell the truth, and you want to brace up, Miss Mary, because its a bad kind and going to be hard to take, but there aint no help for it (420). Hucks maturation is evident here because he cant stand to see Mary Jane and her sisters cheated of the money they deserve, and so happy because their uncles are back when in reality theyre only frauds. Hucks conscience continues to bother him until he tells Mary Jane the truth, and therefore it is apparent that Huck is growing as a result of his travels because his conscience begins to affect him, forcing him to show that he is a good and kind-hearted person. A picaro is often defined as someone who isnt very honest, or straightforward, but instead is something more of a liar. More often than not a picaro has been brought up by a dishonest and unloving family, and therefore has no traditional values. Hucks father was a drunkard, and treated Huck as if he owned him, instead of as a son. Furthermore, Hucks father never acted like a father figure to Huck at all, but instead was cruel and unreliable. Moreover, because of his upbringing Huck had no one to teach him any values, and thus he created his own value system, which was the opposite of the social norm. For example, Huck lied his way through his travels and adventures. His first major lie and the beginning of his adventure was staging his own murder, which enabled him to escape his father. In addition, whenever Huck and Jim met other people along their way some kind of lie always popped out of his mouth. To illustrate this point is the scene where Huck comes along two men in a boat, and Huck wants to surrender Jim, but a fib comes out instead, I wish you would, says I, because its pap thats there, and maybe youd help me tow the raft ashore where the light is. Hes sick-and so is mam and Mary Ann' (310). Huck doesnt even have to think about how to lie because it just happens without any real thought involved. Huck constantly changes his name in his lies. Hence, it is so natural for Huck to lie that it becomes difficult for him to keep track of the names he calls himself within his lies. His lies extend to the point of posing as a young girl to an old woman, but he mixes his names up and is caught in the lie: â€Å"Well, try to remember it, George. Dont forget and tell me its Elexander before you go, and then get out by saying its George Elexander when I catch you. And dont go about women in that old calico. You do a girl tolerable poor but you might fool men, maybe. † (262) Fortunately for Huck, the old woman is a kind-hearted one and lets him go on his way without any real questions. However, one of Hucks major lies occurs during his time with the Duke and the King. They pull a stunt where they charge people to watch them do a revival of a play, despite the fact that they barely know the play or are by no means actors. Consequently, they barely escape from the town on the third night with the money that they had  cheated the townspeople of. Thus, there were many instances where Huck lied and cheated his way through his various encounters and experiences, which ties him in perfectly with the typical picaro stereo-type. A picaresque novel is generally told in autobiographical form. Huck is the narrator within The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and thus is speaking from the first person point-of-view. This is largely associated with the fact that although Huck tells terrible lies and does some terrible things, it is impossible for the readers not to like Huck. Huck tells the story from his own point-of-view, which enables the readers to see things through Hucks eyes. Huck will explain why hes doing something, and because the readers get Hucks explanation and thoughts on it, it is easy to understand and accept it. Hence, it is easy for the readers to side with Huck. Furthermore, because Hucks thoughts are known the readers are able to see and accept that more often than not Huck actually has a good reason for the things he does. One important notion is the fact that Huck does have a good heart, and this is because Hucks adventure is largely due to keeping Jim safe and free. The readers are able to see Hucks thoughts on Jim and how he really does care about him and his freedom, and this makes Huck a good person with a large heart, despite the way hes acted at certain times. In addition to Huck being the narrator is the fact that the story is not only told through Hucks eyes, but also through his own language. Its obvious that Huck isnt the most educated person, but because the novel is told through Hucks own language it makes the novel all the more realistic to the readers. It is easier to see the story through Huck when the slang he uses is also incorporated into the novel. The fact that Hucks slang became a part of the story as well only served to further root Huck as a believable and more realistic character. Furthermore, Hucks accent became a part of the dialogue in order to define him as a unique character within the novel, one on which the novel was centred on. Hucks accent marks him as a true adventurer, and as someone who truly does prefer the frontier to civilization. For example, if Twain had invented Huck without an accent then his believability as an adventurer wouldnt have seemed quite so real. If Huck had traveled down the river void of his accent or slang then he would not have seemed the true loner and adventurer that Twain made him out to be, which is because he would have spoken in the same educated manner that any well-brought up boy would have. Thus, Hucks slang is as much a part of his lifestyle as it is him. Consequently, it is these combined facts of Hucks first-person narration, the readers ability to see everything hes thinking, and the slang that is incorporated into his dialogue that truly marks Huckleberry Finn as a adventurer, but more importantly as an autobiographical character in a picaresque novel. A story that has been defined as picaresque, such as The Adventures ofHuckleberry Finn can also be said to be potentially endless. A picaresque is often described as an adventure story, and thus if a novel is an adventure story then there really is no reason for the adventures to end. A picaresque is said to be potentially endless because it has no tight plot that has to end at a given time. Instead, the plot can change and continue on into infinity. Another literary term for a picaresque being potentially endless is called beads-on-a-string. It is like a yarn, and there is no exact moment when the story starts to wind down and close, but instead there is always an opportunity to keep the story going. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is the perfect example of this. The entire story is centred on Huck and Jims adventures down the river. Huck is running away from his father, and Jim is running away from the possibility of being sold down the river because hes black, and therefore a slave. Huck and Jims adventures do eventually come to an end, but only because Mark Twain decides to end it, not because it has to end. There is no tight plot structure, such as a need for a climax and falling action because these could easily be taken out allowing Huck to continue telling his story, and the reader would never be any the wiser. Furthermore, there is no exact spot in the story where the reader thinks that the story should begin to wind down, and this is because it is a young boys adventure story. Hucks characterization only works because of the age his character represents. Huck represents eternal boyhood, and thus his adventures can also be seen as eternal. Therefore, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is a story that can be potentially endless due to the fact that it is a young boy telling the story who experiences a life of adventures, and there is no reason why those adventures should have to end at any specific time. A picaresque story often involves a picaro that has some kind of sidekick along with him. In the case of Huckleberry Finn, Jim is his sidekick. The sidekick is someone who is a part of the adventure, but isnt seen as the main character, and thus more often than not the readers dont know the sidekicks views or thoughts, or what is known is very limited. Jim is Hucks sidekick, and although Hucks own adventure actually began because he was running away from his father, Jim is the reason that the adventure took the path it did. Jim didnt want to be sold to a slave buyer so instead of taking the chance of being sold he ran away, which is how he came to be Hucks sidekick. They both ran away from different things, and accidentally, but fortunately found each other, Pretty soon he gapped and stretched himself and hove off the blanket-and it was Miss Watsons Jim! I bet I was glad to see him (239). Huck wanted to keep Jim safe and so they decided to go to Cairo where Jim would be free from slavery, en I hear ole missus tell de widder she gwyne to sell me down to Orleans, but she didn want to, but she could git eight hundd dollars for me, en it uz sick a big stack o money she couldn resis' (242). Jim became Hucks sidekick early on in the adventure, and thus the real adventure only began once Jim had become a part of it. However, although it is Hucks adventure, and Jim is Hucks sidekick, the actual adventure itself is about keeping Jim safe and free. Furthermore, both Huck and Jim are running away because they want freedom. Huck wants to be free from his father, and Jim wants to be free from slavery, but by the end of the novel the irony is that Hucks father is dead, and the Widow has set Jim free within her will. Thus, it is Jim that further proves the sidekick mentality within a picaresque novel, and within The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn contains all the elements that any picaresque novel should. Huck Finn is the picaro and alongside him is his sidekick Jim. The adventures that these two encounter along their journey is pure proof of what elements a picaresque novel should include, from lying and cheating to wanderers along a river, to the changes that occur as a result of these adventures. Huck has all the characteristics that a typical picaro or anti-hero should have. Hes dishonest, prefers the frontier to civilization, and hes the narrator of the novel making it in autobiographical form. Therefore, all the aspects within TheAdventures of Huckleberry Finn cement it together to further root it as a picaresque novel with a unique and yet solid picaro as the main character.

Open field agriculture in England

Open field agriculture in England The open field system was a prevalent agricultural system in much of Europe from the middle ages; in some places it was still present up until the 20th century. For example in Herefordshire the last open fields were removed in the 20th century. This form of settlement can also be known as champion land. Each villager was allocated strips usually at a village meeting each year. Their holdings were scattered. However contrary to popular belief not all areas in England had open field farming in the medieval period. For example in Essex and Kent they retained pre Roman system of small square enclosed fields. Lincolnshire was a typical area of open field agriculture. However, much of pre roman Britain was an open field system. There is much division and debate on when the open field system originated. This can be argued that it is down to insufficient distinction being made between a three strip system, a three field system and an open field system.  [1]  H.L.Grays work in English field systems can be seen as a starting point in 1915. However it has now been realised that open field systems are much more complex than he first thought. He focused on the variety of open field systems. Later came Orwins view, in the open fields of 1938, they had a practical approach which was seen to be influential but they assumed that the open field system was fully running from the start which has been proven to be wrong. Then in 1964 came Joan thirsk new view, distinguishing between open fields and common fields and arguing that it developed slowly, maturing in the 13th century. In 1973 historical geographers Baker and Butlin did a number of regional studies which emphasised the variety, and stressed that they evolved . It concluded that the midland field system was more adaptable to change than was once believed.  [2]  This belief that they evolved is accepted but now earlier chronology is now preferred. Then in 1983 in the agricultural history review it drew attention to how they seemed to be planned. This was also argued in 1982 David Hall medieval fields for the 8th and 9th origin subdivided fields laid out in a deliberate act of planning. The original plan was drastically modified over time.  [3]  However this can be disputed R. A. Dodgshon argues that they were not consciously designed, but that they were makeshift and response to a diversity of influences. Opinion has therefore changed and evolved over time but is also still divided. Land was divided into what was known as planned countryside (champion) and ancient countryside (woodland). Thomas Harrison said it is so that soile being divided into champion ground and woodland  [4]  . In the champion everybody lives in uniformly built towns, it is a nucleated village, whereas woodland villages people are scattered. In the champion was where the open fields were, open fields are where there are no hedges or fixed physical boundaries, possibly on the edge but not internally, it has strips. The land is the champion is divided into lots of strips, each individual gets around 30 strips. They are scattered throughout the territory of the parish muddled with everybody elses. However it is in a regular order, as would be their houses in the streets also. Between 1220 and 1240 documents show that wherever Thomas de Hampton had strips then Henry de Kaam was his neighbour.  [5]  The strips of land also known as selions are then grouped into bundles called furlongs, t hese are then grouped into fields. Each village has two or three fields. Each year one of the fields was allowed to remain fallow. They were instead grazed with livestock, they became communal. Therefore it was communal on one hand but on the other individualistic, you got to keep what you grew. The strips could not be bundled into one group because if they were all in one place they may all be fallow for one year. In the late medieval periods they gradually disappear. It is often seen as hard to define when the open field system of agriculture first developed. There are many debates among historians for the origins of the open field system for example in a recent article on the common fields Dr Thirsk attacked the orthodox view of Gray Orwin on the subject. Dr Thirsk defined the classical common field system as being made up of four essential elements.  [6]  At first arable and meadow were divided into strips, then arable and meadow were open for common pasturing, then common rights over waste, then finally this was regulated by a group of people. This definition is quite unobjectionable, though it could be argued that its third element common rights over waste is not strictly essential to it.  [7]  In the journal it is argued that the open field system as it is normally understood did not come into being until the later Middle Ages. It argues that if dr thirsk succeeds in showing that the evidence for the existence of the open field syst em in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries is far from being conclusive or satisfactory.  [8]   Open field agriculture took many forms. Therefore it is hard to pin point when the origin was. The different factors which go to make up the various types of open field systems go some way towards explain the origins of such systems.  [9]  However this is then disputed by archaeologists who are concerned with the physical remains of the past e.g. ridge and furrow. The historians and historical geographers have a different view on the definition of open field systems compared to that of the archaeologists. Historians base their definitions on the systems, and social aspects. Not just merely the remains. This therefore leads to problems in dating when open fields originated. it is extremely difficult to discover the origins of almost any aspect of human behaviour, for until it is relatively common place it is usually difficult to detect archaeologically.  [10]  Also there is the problem that over the years there are changes that disrupt the land. Thus the physical manifestation s of open fields which archaeologists have to deal with are the result of the pattern imposed by the most recent cultivation, not the first.  [11]  Therefore when studying open field systems archaeologists look at the ridge and furrow and accept it to be medieval. It has however become clear from recent work they there was never just one type of open field system. Even by the thirteenth century, there was not one type of open field system but many.  [12]  There is often a pessimistic approach to the origins of open fields. The evidence that remains to help us discover the origins of the open field system includes ridge and furrow. A heavy plough, capable of turning over sod would cut the furrow and a mold board turns the soil sideways, pulled by 6 to 8 ox. We know this from domesday. This would gradually mound the soil up in the middle of the strip. The strips were not straight but always shaped as an s but backwards. This is because of the turning room the plough needed and the fact that most were right handed. We can date ridge and furrow from any time after the introduction of the heavy plough and not necessarily medieval. By the 11th century it was in use in most of England. It is important to remember that there was never one open field system over Britain that was identical and used. It also changed over the years. It developed over time. Why it grew is important. There needed to be a solution to the problem of farming with certain soils, animals, climate, topography, crops, markets, transportation and so forth. At any one moment there were open field villages in various stages of evolution.  [13]  Hard to define what an open field system was. It was different in different areas so can seen to be started at different times. Consequently, the second complex phenomenon behind the label is the lack of agreement of what is to be understood by an open field system, as different authors disagree to some extent on what constitutes the salient interlocking features of the system.  [14]   There are many broad outlines to what an open field system was and when it developed over the country making it difficult to summarise when it evolved. There is also lots of literature on this topic which is diverse. One of the earliest pieces of evidence of the early open field system comes from a law from King Ine of Wessex. If ceorls have a common meadow or other share land to enclose, and some have enclosed their share while other have not.  [15]  This was issued between 668 and 694. It gives evidence to the early existence of open fields. However it doesnt give elements of the whole system. It does not mention strips, cropping rules, common grazing or regulations. We cannot however assume that all land even within the same community was treated the same. All of the elements therefore may not have originated at once but could have been gradual. Then in 966 a charter refers to arable share land. it is very likely that the exploitation of the agricultural resources of midland E ngland was well established by the tenth century, although it is equally likely that the complex open filed system did not reach its full maturity before the twelfth.  [16]  There are now lots of evidence to suggest that the introduction of the open field system was a long term process. When looking at maps of open field systems you can see that each system is logically adapted to the geography of its parish. Also different systems co existed side by side in the same geographical area. The open field system originated because it was sufficient at feeding the population. Local landowners would rent land to farmers known as tenants, they would grow enough to survive and any left would be sold to market. Ridge and furrow advantages include drainage especially on heavy clay soils where the water wont drain easily. However you do not want to plough light soils such as chalk. Also there is the creased table cloth theory. Possible resistance to soil erosion and it creates more surface area so there is more land to grow crops on. For many centuries it met the countrys need for food, it also let villagers have a say as it made decision by vote, and people were working together, there was also the common land so a sense of community. It went hand in hand with the development of villages clustered around a nucleus of church and manor house. This created a sense of community, they worked communally, and open field agriculture is an example of this. In some villages, villagers owned a team of oxen so ploughed the strips in sequence. However in some ways it can also be seen as individualistic. It gradually spread over England, but it can never be said that it completely took over. The most common open field system was where a village had 3 bigs fields with the village located in the centre, each field could be miles across and each villagers would have strips of land in each field so that each would have a share of good and bad land.