Aug. 12
COLORADO:
Holmes' lawyers want death penalty tossed over leak to Fox News----The defense
asked the judge to either scrap the death penalty, bar more than a dozen
officers who saw the notebook from testifying, or appoint a special prosecutor
to investigate the leak
Lawyers for accused theater shooter James Holmes want the judge to toss the
death penalty as possible punishment amid ongoing concerns about an apparent
law enforcement leak to a Fox News reporter in the days after the shootings.
In a motion released Monday, the defense argues that the leak of information
about a notebook Holmes mailed to his psychiatrist right before the July 20,
2012, shootings violated a judge's order and Holmes' right to a fair trial by
sharing crucial evidence with the public.
The defense asked the judge to either scrap the death penalty, bar more than a
dozen officers who saw the notebook from testifying, or appoint a special
prosecutor to investigate the leak.
Prosecutors objected to the measure, the defense said.
Holmes' lawyers have argued since 2012 that a law enforcement violated the
judge's gag order and possibly committed perjury when they leaked information
about the notebook to Fox News reporter Jana Winter. The defense tried to
compel Winter to disclose who her source was, but a judge in her homestate of
New York ruled against the defense and said New York law barred the defense
from forcing her to disclose the information.
Holmes is accused of killing 12 and wounding dozens more in the shooting
rampage. He has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity.
(source: Aurora Sentinel)
******************
Attorneys seeks details on informant in Denver bar attack that killed 5
Attorneys for the man facing the death penalty for allegedly stabbing 5 people
to death in a Denver bar said Monday they want more information about a 4th man
connected to the attack.
Dexter Lewis, 24, is charged with 16 counts, including 1st-degree murder, in
the attack at Fero's Bar and Grill that left 5 people dead in October 2012.
Lewis' attorneys argued on Monday that prosecutors should continue seeking and
disclosing information about Demarea Harris. Harris was working as a
confidential informant for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
Explosives at the time of the attack.
Harris has never been arrested or charged in the attack, and defense attorneys
are seeking more information about the work he did for the ATF and the cases he
provided information on.
Prosecutors say they have given defense attorneys all of the information the
ATF released to them.
Defense attorneys called ATF Agent Brandy Spasaro, who handled Harris when he
worked as a confidential informant. Spasaro received some details about Harris'
work for the ATF, but declined to answer several questions that she said
pertained to confidential information.
Harris was recruited by the ATF after he was arrested by Denver police for
possessing what appeared to be a small amount of crack cocaine. He continued to
work as a confidential informant, completing a number of controlled purchases,
until the October 2012 attacks.
In exchange for his work the ATF agree to speak to the Denver District
Attorneys office on his behalf about the drug charge, Spasaro said. He was also
paid about $3,000 for his work.
After Harris spoke to police about the deaths at Fero's bar, the ATF gave
Harris about $2,500 for temporary housing and relocation fees. Spasaro said
Harris is no longer working as an ATF informant.
Spasaro said there were at least 5 people Harris provided information about to
the ATF. She could not discuss details of those cases or the information Harris
provided.
In their motion seeking more information about Harris, defense attorneys listed
three cases Harris was "involved in." Those cases involved drug and weapons
charges.
About 200 motions have been filed in the case and attorneys are expected to
argue several of them during hearings this week. Many of the filings address
what evidence will be admitted at trial, including statements by 4 other men
connected to the case.
1 other men charged in the case, brothers Joseph and Lynell Hill, have accepted
plea agreements and have received lengthy sentences. Their statements
contradict those made by Harris who told investigators Joseph Hill was the
first person to start stabbing the victims.
Defense attorneys are also challenging statements made by Lewis' former
cellmate at the Denver jail. Lewis allegedly asked the cellmate to find and
kill several witnesses in the case and provided him with a hand-drawn map of
the crime scene.
The victims were the bar's owner, Young Suk Fero, 63, of Aurora; Daria M. Pohl,
21, of Denver; Kellene Fallon, 44, of Denver; Ross Richter, 29, of Overland
Park, Kan.; and Tereasa Beesley, 45, of Denver.
(source: The Denver Post)
ARIZONA:
Jodi Arias Trial Update: Lead Attorney Motions to Quit Upcoming Death Penalty
Trial
Just days after convicted boyfriend killer Jodi Arias was granted permission to
represent herself at the 2nd phase of her upcoming murder trial, her lead
attorney filed a motion asking the judge to let him resign from the case.
Back in May 2013, the 34-year-old waitress was found guilty of the 1st-degree
murder of her lover Travis Alexander, who was murdered in his Phoenix home in
in 2008. According to medical examiners, Arias stabbed him 27 times, primarily
in the back, torso and heart. She also slit Alexander's throat from ear to ear,
nearly decapitating him, and shot him in the face before she dragged his
bloodied corpse to the shower.
Although Arias was convicted of murder, the jurors failed to reach a unanimous
decision on her sentencing. As a result, her retrial will begin on Sept. 8 to
determine whether or not she should be sentenced to death, life in prison or
life with a chance of release after serving 25 years, Reuters reported.
On Monday, Judge Sherry Stephens granted Arias, who has a history of clashing
with her defense team, her request to represent herself in the penalty phase
trial next month, reported The Associated Press.
As a result, her lead attorney, Kirk Nurmi, and his 2nd-chair attorney,
Jennifer Willmott, were appointed as her legal advisers.
However, on Friday, Nurmi petitioned the court to let him quit.
When he first asked to be removed from the case back in 2011, a judge denied
the motion. This time, Nurmi filed a motion asking for reconsideration since he
is no longer ethically obliged to stay on the case.
In his motion he stated, "His ethical obligations to Ms. Arias are lessened to
the point where these ethical obligations are of significantly lesser import,"
reported AZ Central.
He also noted that Arias has repeatedly tried to fire him from the case and
that he and Arias could not come to an agreement on a defense strategy for the
retrial.
Arias, who lacks legal experience and a college degree, will be responsible for
arguing why she should not receive the death penalty before a jury.
However, Judge Stephens told gave her leverage to change her mind on the
condition that, if she asks to have attorneys represent her again, it will be
final.
(source: latinpost.com)
****************
Court resurrects Arizona death-row inmate's suit
An appeals court has resurrected a lawsuit by an Arizona death row inmate who
alleged a prison officer violated his constitutional rights by reading a letter
he wrote to his lawyer.
A 3-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday in
prisoner Scott D. Nordstrom's appeal that the Constitution doesn't let prison
officers read outgoing letters between inmates and their lawyers.
The ruling revives Nordstrom's legal claims and sends his lawsuit back to a
lower court, but it makes no changes to his convictions or death sentence.
Nordstrom, 46, was convicted of killing 6 people in 2 robberies in 1996 in
Tucson. 2 people were killed at a smoke shop in 1 robbery, while 4 others were
killed during a holdup 14 days later at a social club. Nordstrom was sentenced
to death. 1 of his accomplices was executed last year.
Nordstrom alleged a jail officer read his 2-page letter in May 2011, refused
his requests to stop viewing it and claimed he had the power to search mail for
contraband and scan the contents to ensure they concerned legal matters. The
prisoner claimed the experience forced him to stop relaying sensitive
information about his case to his lawyer.
***************************
Life or death: Penalty phase begins for convicted cop killer
The penalty phase is now underway in the trial of an Arizona man convicted of
murder in the 2007 shooting of a Glendale police officer.
A jury last month determined that 40-year-old Bryan Wayne Hulsey qualifies for
the death penalty in the shooting death of 24-year-old Officer Anthony Holly.
Jurors are considering whether to sentence Hulsey to death or life in prison.
Hulsey was a passenger in the vehicle that had been pulled over for speeding
and not having a license plate.
Holly was there to serve as backup to another officer who made the traffic
stop.
Prosecutors say Hulsey exited the vehicle and fired 2 shots, 1 of which hit
Holly.
Defense attorneys argue Holly was unintentionally shot by the officer who made
the stop.
Holly's parents spoke out in court Monday. Holly's mother Nancy Bonner told the
jury that her son brightened her every day. "He was kind, he was smart, funny,
silly, and now everything is different," she said.
During her statement to jurors, Bonner showed them photos of her son, and said
the endless heartache of losing him causes her physical pain.
"My sleep is filled with visions of Tony being killed," Bonner said in court.
"Wondering what was it like. Wondering what he was thinking. Was he thinking of
me? Thinking of his beautiful girlfriend? Brother Jim? His family? What was he
hearing? Did he hear his own blood gurgling in his throat? The other officers
crying over him? What did he know? What did he see? It's there all the time."
Hulsey's family members are also expected to speak out in court
(source for both: Associated Press)
*********************
Killer's Suit Over Legal Mail Breach Revived
The 9th Circuit on Monday revived a death-row inmate's claim that a prison
guard illegally read his confidential letter to counsel.
Facing the death penalty in Arizona, Scott Nordstrom alleges his Sixth
Amendment right to counsel was violated in 2011 when a guard read a letter
Nordstrom had written to his court-appointed lawyer and clearly marked as
"legal mail."
Nordstrom argued that the guard had gone beyond scanning the contents of the
letter for references to contraband or safety issues.
U.S. District Judge David Campbell dismissed Nordstrom's lawsuit for failure to
state a valid claim, but a divided 3-judge panel of the 9th Circuit reversed
Monday and sent the case back to Phoenix for further action.
Prison officials may "inspect" outgoing mail but cannot "read a confidential
letter from an inmate to his lawyer," Judge Barry Silverman wrote for the
majority.
"This is because it is highly likely that a prisoner would not feel free to
confide in his lawyer such things as incriminating or intimate personal
information - as is his Sixth Amendment right to do - if he knows that the
guards are reading his mail," Silverman added. "Reading legal mail - not merely
inspecting or scanning it - is what Nordstrom alleges the Department of
Corrections is doing, and it is what he seeks to enjoin. We hold today that his
allegations, if true, state a Sixth Amendment violation."
Prison officials argued that guards could legally read an inmate's missives to
a lawyer in the presence of the inmate, but the appellate panel found that this
only helped Nordstrom's allegations survive.
"Nordstrom's allegations that prison officials read his legal mail, that they
claim entitlement to do so, and that his right to private consultation with
counsel has been chilled state a Sixth Amendment claim," Silverman wrote,
adding that Nordstrom also had made a proper claim for injunctive relief
related to this policy.
Writing in dissent, Judge Jay Bybee argued that the majority had misinterpreted
Supreme Court precedent, and that Nordstrom had failed to show he was injured
in any way by the single event.
"In my view, the Sixth Amendment does not prevent prison officials from reading
legal letters with an eye toward discovering illegal conduct," Bybee wrote.
"Furthermore, claims under the Sixth Amendment require proof of actual injury,
and Nordstrom does not allege any."
(source: Courthouse News)
CALIFORNIA:
Arraignment set for 4 people accused in USC student's beating death----Chinese
grad student was attacked while walking to his off campus apartment
2 adults and 2 teenagers are scheduled to be arraigned today on murder charges
stemming from the beating death of a USC graduate student from China who was
attacked while walking back to his apartment near the campus.
Jonathan Del Carmen, 19 and Andrew Garcia, 18, are charged along with Alberto
Ochoa, 17, and Alejandra Guerrero, 16, in the attack on Xinran Ji, 24, that
occurred around 12:45 a.m. July 24 near 29th Street and Orchard Avenue.
They are all jailed without bail.
The criminal complaint includes the special-circumstance allegation that the
murder occurred during an attempted robbery.
Prosecutors will decide later whether to seek the death penalty against Del
Carmen and Garcia.
Ochoa and Guerrero, who were charged as adults, cannot face the death penalty
because they are under 18.
The criminal complaint alleges that Garcia, Ochoa and Guerrero used deadly
weapons - a bat and a wrench - during the crime, in which authorities said Ji
was beaten and struck on the head.
The electrical engineering graduate student, who was walking home after taking
part in a study group, managed to make it back to his City Park apartment in
the 1200 block of West 30th Street, where he was found dead about 7 a.m. July
24.
A trail of blood marked the path he walked.
Garcia, Ochoa and Guerrero are also charged with 1 count each of robbery,
attempted robbery and assault with a deadly weapon for an alleged attack on a
man and woman at Dockweiler Beach later that day.
The group allegedly robbed the woman, but the man managed to escape and flag
down police, according to Deputy District Attorney John McKinney.
(source: KESQ news)
USA:
Sentenced to death by lethal bureaucracy; Delays and paperwork may be the death
penalty's greatest counterarguments
Recently, a federal judge ruled that California's death penalty was
unconstitutional because of the delay between death sentence and execution -
currently more than 20 years in California. As a result of this decision, more
than 700 of the state's inmates have had their death sentences commuted to life
in prison without parole. For the 17 inmates scheduled to be executed in
California, no clear protocol appears to exist as to how or when they will be
executed.
While District Court Judge Cormac Carney based his ruling on the Eighth
Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, he did not argue that
the death penalty itself is cruel and unusual. Rather, he wrote that the
administrative delays result in high degrees of randomness regarding who will
be executed and when and that this waiting game amounts to cruel and unusual
punishment. As he put it in his ruling:
Indeed, for most [death row inmates], systemic delay has made their execution
so unlikely that the death sentence carefully and deliberately imposed by the
jury has been quietly transformed into one no rational jury or legislature
could ever impose: life in prison, with the remote possibility of death. As for
the random few for whom execution does become a reality, they will have
languished for so long on death row that their execution will serve no
retributive or deterrent purpose and will be arbitrary.
Carney did not comment on whether a quicker route to execution would be
constitutional, and his decision leaves open the possibility that California
could streamline its process and reinstate the death sentence. But for now,
because the California system operates like a lottery, with little to no reason
behind who may be executed and when, all executions have been halted.
In the absence of a moral decision by elected officials or the public to end
executions in the U.S., the tyranny of bureaucracy - delays, paperwork and all
- might be an anti-death-penalty advocate???s best ally.
Administrative halt
While the court decision may still be overturned on appeal, this case, in
conjunction with the recent public kerfuffle over the new drug combinations
used for lethal injection, suggests that the death penalty's days are numbered.
While there's been no real push to end the death penalty on moral grounds - the
argument that the death penalty is cruel and unusual per se seems to be
forestalled by current Supreme Court jurisprudence - it will likely grind to an
administrative halt, both legally and in the court of public opinion, precisely
because state governments cannot find a way to carry out executions without
revealing their internal inefficiencies.
The Supreme Court previously ruled the death penalty unconstitutional on
administrative grounds. In the 1972 Supreme Court case Furman v. Georgia, in
which the court struck down the death penalty as it existed in the United
States at the time, Justice William J. Brennan wrote a concurring opinion that
resonates with the rationale behind many arguments against the death penalty.
He thought that the true problem with the death penalty statutes were that
"they treat members of the human race as nonhumans, as objects to be toyed with
and discarded." He and Justice Thurgood Marshall thought that the death penalty
was, on its face, unconstitutional, but the court majority decided that the
death penalty was permissible as long as it was applied consistently and
without discrimination. As a result, states rewrote their laws to add what are
usually called aggravating factors (e.g., planned murder, murder committed in
connection with other felonies like kidnapping and rape) and mitigating ones
(e.g., mental state, mental illness, childhood abuse) that juries must consider
before they condemn someone to death.
"What if the death penalty is such a bureaucratic nightmare that no one should
be subjected to it, least of all the tax-paying public?"
Most death penalty appeals rely on the Eighth Amendment to the extent that
Furman and other cases have held that the death penalty is cruel and unusual
when applied to certain classes of people: the mentally ill, juveniles and a
disproportionate number of racial minorities. For a long time, many
anti-death-penalty advocates and those who represent the condemned on appeal
(legal work I have done) have argued that the death penalty can never be
fulfilled in a way that is fair because of jury selection and local judicial
politics. The facts indicate that people on death row in every state are mostly
poor and members of a racial minority. A significant number are mentally ill.
But the latest death penalty objections present a different argument: What if
the death penalty is such a bureaucratic nightmare that no one should be
subjected to it, least of all the tax-paying public? Here Brennan's language
about "objects to be toyed with" recalls the nightmare of waiting for Veterans
Administration benefits, of people lost in endless paperwork and delay. Today
it's easy to feel alienated and reduced to a number in situations ranging from
renewing a driver's license to applying for Social Security, so the inhumanity
of delay may resonate with voters more vividly than persuading people that
convicted murderers deserve to be kept alive. The general public expresses
little concern about those who commit crimes as long as they are kept out of
sight.
Human playthings
Brennan's objection to treating humans as playthings - an essentially moral
argument - isn't too far removed from the recent administrative objections to
last month's Arizona execution, in which convicted murderer Joseph R. Wood's
lawyers appealed his death sentence under the First Amendment, arguing that he
was entitled to know where the drugs that would kill him came from. Because the
makers of sodium thiopental, a drug that had been regularly used for lethal
injections, refuse to export the drug for that purpose, states are forced to
experiment with other combinations. Wood was ultimately executed with the Ohio
2-drug protocol: medazolam and hydromorphone. The case bounced back and forth,
with a 3-judge panel for the Ninth Circuit agreeing that Arizona could not
execute Wood until it revealed the source of its drugs. The Supreme Court
decided that the execution should move forward by denying the stay of
execution, with no comment.
The unavailability of drugs previously used to execute convicts reveals the
cracks in the seams about the death penalty - the seeming callousness of state
officials in the face of a serious undertaking. There's something undeniably
crude about the reported Texas-Oklahoma football joke by the Oklahoma assistant
attorney general when Texas asked Oklahoma for some pentobarbital in order to
carry out its scheduled executions.
Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski even argued that states should resort to the
guillotine or firing squads because lethal injection was causing such
administrative nightmares. And yesterday a federal judge extended a moratorium
on executions in Ohio until January to give the state more time to figure out a
new procedure for killing inmates with a different combination of lethal
chemicals.
These sorts of moves stem from the same frustration Carney expressed in his
opinion. In a technologically advanced age, why can't states execute inmates in
a manner that doesn't appall so many people?
Kozinski's argument that the lethal injection isn't the best method of
execution resonates. He thinks that executions shouldn't be "serene or
beautiful." They are - and should be - brutal. Observers at Wood's execution
say he took nearly 2 hours to die, gurgling and gasping to the end. Some might
argue that he deserved it. But perhaps the most chilling point of all was a
state official's insistent denial that anything had gone wrong.
Objecting to the death penalty on administrative grounds rather than moral ones
appears to avoid this conundrum. No one, especially state officials, needs to
face the brutality of government-sanctioned death at all, and no one needs to
wonder why the death penalty has persisted in the United States when most
Western countries have outlawed it. This may be the most logical end to the
death penalty, a way that requires no one to admit fault.
(source: Editorial; Jessica Pishko graduated with a J.D. from Harvard Law
School and received an M.F.A. from Columbia University. She practiced corporate
law, specializing in securities fraud, and represented death penalty clients
and victims of domestic abuse pro bono----Al Jazeera America)
**********************
Former DOC Chief Doctor Says There's No Way to Fix Botched Executions
As the debate over botched executions rages on, a doctor once in charge of
healthcare for Washington's Department of Corrections is adding his voice to
the chorus of critics. Last Wednesday, the U.K's Guardian published a piece by
Marc Stern arguing that there's no way for lethal injections not to be botched.
As he explains in his piece, and in a conversation with me this morning, the
crux of his argument is that the process is inherently flawed because it exists
outside the realm of science. While a doctor developed the cocktail of drugs
used for executions in the '70s, the method was not subject to the same kind of
scrutiny as normal medical procedures.
"There may have been animal studies," he elaborates by phone from Olympia,
where he now works as a health care consultant. "But there certainly weren't
human trials." Nor, he says, were there articles in peer-reviewed journals
outlining the method and explaining research results.
Shrouded by secrecy, this "substandard" approach, as he sees it, continues to
this day. Medical professionals don't openly discuss how the drugs used for
lethal injections are working and what refinements need to be made. Few are
even privy to the details of what those drugs are - especially after European
manufacturers stopped supplying their products for executions and states had to
scramble for new ones.
Doctors really need to be in on this process for it to be done effectively,
Stern maintains. Even finding a vein for the condemned prisoner, especially one
who is older or has abused drugs, calls out for a professional.
Up to a point, this is not an entirely unique perspective. As Stern points out,
Georgia's Dr. Carlo Musso has expressed similar sentiments in explaining why he
has taken part in executions. In fact, in an interview with Atul Gawande for
The New England Journal of Medicine, Musso said physicians have a
"responsibility" to ensure the comfort of the condemned in their dying moments.
Stern, who resigned from the DOC in 2008 after finding out that the department
(ironcially then led by Eldon Vail, who has since emerged as a death peanlty
critic) had involved members of his staff in planning for an execution, makes a
different leap of logic. He insists doctors are ethically bound, by the
Hippocratic oath and the positions of various professional organizations, to
keep a wide distance from executions.
And so, he reasons that lethal injections are doomed, dashing the hopes of
those wanting a "humane" means of execution. "We can't get there from here," he
writes in The Guardian.
The former DOC official says he has no intention of becoming an anti-death
penalty activist. He's more invested in working on other pressing needs related
to the health care of inmates. Still, he says he's willing to voice his views
when asked; The Guardian came to him. One imagines, with Governor's Jay
Inslee's moratorium on the death penalty forcing the issue eventually, that
others may ask again.
(source: Seattle Weekly)
*********************
Prosecutors Hope To Have Decision For Man Responsible For LAX Shooting Last
Year By November
Federal prosecutors said today they expect a decision by mid-November on
whether the death penalty will be sought against a 24-year-old suspect accused
in a deadly shooting spree at Los Angeles International Airport.
The ultimate decision on whether death is an appropriate penalty in the case
against Paul Anthony Ciancia is up to Attorney General Eric Holder.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Joanna M. Curtis told the court that her office had
provided its recommendation to Holder as to the penalty, but did not indicate
what that was.
"Unfortunately, it's not up to us," Curtis told the court, adding that the
investigation by her office was ongoing.
However, lawyers for Ciancia said they planned to travel to Washington, D.C.,
at some point to present their arguments against the death penalty to the U.S.
Department of Justice.
Curtis said prosecutors had accumulated about 10,000 pages and 150 DVDs of
discovery in the case, including material collected during a probe of Ciancia's
background in the small town of Pennsville, N.J., which they had presented to
the defense.
U.S. District Judge Philip S. Gutierrez was adamant that the case would be
tried next year, although defense attorney Hilary L. Potashner said she may ask
for more time if death is sought.
Ciancia, who stands a little over 5 feet, was brought to court in green and
white jail clothing, shackled at the wrists, waist and ankles. At the request
of defense counsel, U.S. marshals unshackled his wrists for the brief hearing.
3 charges in the 11-count indictment against Ciancia carry the potential for a
death sentence: murder of a federal officer, use of a firearm that led to the
murder, and act of violence in an international airport, according to Thom
Mrozek, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office.
Ciancia had been living in Sun Valley for about 2 years when he allegedly
stormed into Terminal 3 last Nov. 1 with an assault rifle, killing
Transportation Security Administration agent Gerardo Hernandez and wounding 3
others - 2 other TSA workers and 1 traveler.
Ciancia allegedly shot Hernandez at a lower-level LAX passenger check-in
station and began walking upstairs, but returned when he realized Hernandez was
still alive and shot him again.
In addition to 1st-degree murder, the indictment charges Ciancia with 2 counts
of attempted murder for the shootings of TSA officers Tony Grigsby and James
Speer. Brian Ludmer, a Calabasas teacher, was also wounded.
Ciancia is also charged with committing acts of violence at an international
airport, 1 count of using a firearm to commit murder, and 3 counts of
brandishing and discharging a firearm.
During the shooting spree, Ciancia was allegedly carrying a handwritten, signed
note saying he wanted to kill TSA agents and "instill fear in their traitorous
minds," along with dozens of rounds of ammunition. Witnesses to the shooting
said the gunman asked them whether they worked for the TSA, and if they said
no, he moved on.
Ciancia was shot in the head and leg during a gun battle with airport police.
He spent more than two weeks at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center before he was
moved to a San Bernardino facility, and subsequently to the downtown
Metropolitan Detention Center, where he remains held without bail.
(source: Beverly Hills Courier)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/deathpenalty@lists.washlaw.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
