Straits of Corfu

The Straits of Corfu or Corfu Channel is the narrow body of water along the coasts of Albania and Greece to the east, separating these two countries from the Greek island of Corfu on the west. The channel is a passage from the Adriatic Sea on the north to the Ionian Sea that is used by shipping local to Albania and Greece to the ports of Saranda, Albania, and Igoumenitsa, Greece, and by local and tourist traffic in Albania and from the Greek mainland to Corfu, in addition to some international traffic from the Adriatic.
Corfu Channel Incident.
The Corfu Channel Incident refers to three separate incidents involving Royal Navy ships in the Straits of Corfu which took place in 1946, and it is considered an early episode of the Cold War. During the first incident, Royal Navy ships came under fire from Albanian fortifications. The second incident involved Royal Navy ships striking mines and the third incident occurred when the Royal Navy conducted mine-clearing operations in the Corfu Channel, but in Albanian territorial waters, and Albania complained about them to the United Nations. This series of incidents led to the Corfu Channel Case, where the United Kingdom brought a case against the People's Republic of Albania to the International Court of Justice. Because of the incidents, Britain, in 1946, broke off talks with Albania aimed at establishing diplomatic relations between the two countries. Diplomatic relations were only restored in 1991.


Canadian Observatory on Homelessness

The Canadian Observatory on Homelessness (COH)—formerly named the Canadian Homelessness Research Network (CHRN)—is a Canadian non-profit, non-partisan research institute that works with researchers, service providers, policy makers, students and people who have experienced homelessness.
Research focuses.
The COH focuses on the following areas: "systems responses" to homelessness; determining effective models of housing and support; Aboriginal homelessness; homelessness prevention; youth homelessness; legal and justice issues; measuring progress towards ending homelessness; knowledge mobilization and research impact.
The organization’s website, the Homeless Hub, offers information on the causes of and solutions to homelessness.
Founding and structure.
The CHRN was founded in 2008, through a 7-year Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) grant. Its goals were to enhance networking amongst stakeholders in the field and to mobilize homelessness research in Canada.
Through a second SSHRC grant awarded in 2013, the CHRN was renamed the Canadian Observatory on Homelessness (COH). The COH continues the work of the CHRN and introduces a program of research that includes local, provincial and national monitoring activities, as well as original research that addresses key issues in homelessness. The current and founding Director is Dr. Stephen Gaetz, a professor at York University in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, where the COH is also housed. Members of the COH include 28 academics from institutions across Canada, as well as 28 agencies and community organizations.
Definition of homelessness.
In 2005 there was no consistent definition of homelessness. At the time, most research and programs focused on "absolute homelessness" and public policy initiatives.
In 2012, the CHRN/COH released the Canadian definition of homelessness to create a common understanding when it comes to measuring homelessness in Canada, and identifying goals, interventions and strategies to address homelessness effectively. The CHRN’s definition of homelessness, which is closely based on the European Typology of Homelessness and Housing Exclusion (ETHOS) definition, groups the homeless population into four categories: "unsheltered", "emergency sheltered", "provisionally accommodated" and "at risk of homelessness."
The new definition received a lot of support and also faced some criticism. Since then, the Canadian definition of homelessness has been endorsed by 75 scholars and community organizations.
Research and publications.
The COH produces a number of resources to help service providers, researchers, policy makers etc., better understand and tackle the problem of homelessness.
In collaboration with the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness, the COH (then CHRN) released the State of Homelessness in Canada in 2013, what they call the first national report card on homelessness in Canada. The report card stated that 30,000 Canadians are homeless every day, 200,000 in any given year. The report’s authors urged policy-makers to do a better job of tracking homelessness and evaluating the effectiveness of their responses.
In 2014, this report was updated to show that 235,000 Canadians experience homelessness every year, costing the economy $7 billion. According to the report, it would only take $46 more per Canadian to drastically reduce homelessness across the country.
The COH also published a book on Housing First in Canada in 2013. It examines how this approach has been applied in Canada. Subsequently, in 2014 the COH published a framework on Housing First specifically targeted to youth.
In collaboration with the Mental Health Commission of Canada (MHCC), the COH released the Canadian Housing First Toolkit website, which hosts resources on planning, implementing, sustaining and evaluating a Housing First program. The Toolkit’s resources are primarily based on the MHCC’s "At Home" research project ("Chez Soi" in French) which looked to address homelessness for people with mental illness by combining treatment with places to live. The Toolkit was funded by Health Canada.
Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness.
In 2012 the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness was formed to raise awareness of homelessness in Canada and to " through the development of 10 Year Plans to End Homelessness (10 Year Plans)." Following the publication of the U. S. National Alliance to End Homelessness' pivotal 2000 report entitled "A Plan, Not a Dream: How to End Homelessness in Ten Years" the successful movement became international. The chair of the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness is Alex Himelfarb.


Royal Life Saving Western Australia

Royal Life Saving Western Australia is a water safety, swimming and lifesaving education organisation in Western Australia. It is the Western Australian branch of the Royal Life Saving Society Australia.
The organisation was founded in May 1909 as the Royal Life Saving Society of Western Australia at a meeting held at the Amateur Sports' Club in Murray Street. Rules largely based on those of the Royal Life Saving Society in London were adopted in June 1909.
By the 1970s officers of the society were travelling to regional and remote centres of the state, such as Paraburdoo to raise public awareness and educate school children and the general public – via lecturers and film, as well as practical demonstrations at swimming pools where possible.
Royal Life Saving WA issues bravery awards for lifesaving acts, to inspire the public to improve their skills in case of emergencies.


Perivaldo Dantas

Perivaldo Lúcio Dantas (12 July 1953 – 27 July 2017), known simply as Perivaldo, was a Brazilian footballer who played as a right back.
Football career.
Born in Itabuna, Bahia, Perivaldo started his career with local amateurs Itabuna Esporte Clube. In 1975 he moved straight to the Série A where he would remain until his retirement, starting with Esporte Clube Bahia.
In his country's top flight Perivaldo also represented Botafogo de Futebol e Regatas, São Paulo FC, Sociedade Esportiva Palmeiras and Bangu Atlético Clube. He scored seven goals for the first in only 13 appearances in the 1982 season, helping it finish in 18th position amongst 44 teams.
Perivaldo earned two caps for Brazil. In the late 80s, after living three years in South Korea, he relocated to Portugal in hopes of finding a new club, but eventual poor choices and several misfortunes ended up with him as a homeless person having to resort to street vending in Lisbon.
Perivaldo returned to his homeland on 11 December 2013 at the age of 60, with the help of the Portuguese Professional Footballers Union. He had been subjected to a three-week follow-up by Portuguese TV channel SIC, and that and posterior footage resulted in the making of a documentary.
Death.
Perivaldo died on 27 July 2017 at the age of 64 in Rio de Janeiro, victim of pneumonia.


Erythredemic polyneuropathy


John MacDougall (British politician)

John William MacDougall (8 December 1947 – 13 August 2008) was a British Labour politician who served as Member of Parliament (MP) for Glenrothes from the 2005 general election until his death; he was first elected to the House of Commons for Central Fife in the 2001 general election.
He was a low-profile MP who was loyal to the Labour government. From 2007 he was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, and due to his illness, his participation in Parliament became fleeting, although he remained as an MP until his death in August the following year.
Early life.
MacDougall was educated at Templehall Junior Secondary School in Kirkcaldy, Fife. He later obtained a diploma in industrial management and a certificate in naval architecture studies. He began work as an apprentice caulker riveter at Rosyth Dockyard, but his main working life was spent as a boilermaker from 1964 at the oil rig construction yard in Methil. He became a shop steward for the GMB trade union, later full-time Shop Steward Convenor.
Political career.
Fife councillor.
After joining the Labour Party in 1981, MacDougall was elected as a Labour Party member of Fife Regional Council for Burntisland the following year. He became leader of the regional council in 1987, formally as Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee, leaving work to be a full-time councillor, and serving until the Regional Council was abolished in the reform of local government.
MacDougall was elected to the new Fife unitary council in 1995 and became Convenor of the council when it assumed its powers in April 1996. MacDougall's position as leader led him to accept several other appointments, including as Chair of the Rosyth Dockyard and Naval Base Coordinating Committee, a director of Fife Enterprise, and Chair and director of Community Business Fife Ltd. In the mid-1990s he led the council's efforts to keep the Rosyth base open, including writing to every Conservative MP to ask them to support a defence review not led by the Treasury. He was a member of the Scottish Constitutional Convention which established the framework for the Scottish Parliament.
Parliament.
When Henry McLeish announced that he would stand down from his UK Parliament seat in Central Fife on moving to the Scottish Parliament, MacDougall was thought to be likely to be beaten to the selection as his successor by the former Labour Party general secretary Alex Rowley. However MacDougall was announced as the winner of the ballot. MacDougall was slightly embarrassed during the election campaign when his son Scott played a kilted Scottish National Party candidate in a party broadcast (the broadcast depicted the other party's candidates as wearing underwear under their kilts, said to be the sign of a fake Scotsman, while the presenter checks and confirms the SNP candidate is a true Scotsman).
MacDougall won with a majority of 10,075. Within months he was facing criticism for lack of activity, being named by a "Daily Mail" survey as the third least active Scottish backbench MP.
Boundary changes.
A boundary review cutting the number of United Kingdom Parliamentary seats in Scotland put MacDougall's seat in danger by enlarging it with parts taken from Kirkcaldy; it was rumoured that Kirkcaldy MP Lewis Moonie intended to challenge MacDougall. MacDougall was said to be "absolutely distraught" and intended to defend himself. He was mentioned as a potential candidate for the Central Fife constituency in the Scottish Parliament when Henry McLeish announced his retirement; however the selection went to his successor as council leader, Christine May. MacDougall won the selection for the new Glenrothes constituency when Lewis Moonie opted to retire instead.
Burns translation.
To celebrate Burns Night in 2003, MacDougall had some of Robert Burns' most famous poems translated out of the Scots language into contemporary English to make them comprehensible for English guests. When Labour MPs were reported to be plotting to get Tony Blair to resign the leadership in favour of Gordon Brown, MacDougall was quoted as a supporter of Brown in opposing the plotting as not in his interests.
Illness and death.
In May 2007 MacDougall revealed that he had serious health problems. He had had a lung removed after being diagnosed with asbestosis, which he blamed on his work in shipyards, but said that his doctor expected him to return to full health "in a couple of weeks". In October it was said that he was likely to stand down in the event of a snap general election; however no election was called.
MacDougall was not recorded as having participated in any Parliamentary votes from early December 2007, and by June 2008 it was clear that his health problems were serious and there was a rumour that he would have to resign. However another rumour said that he was recovering and likely to return to work. MacDougall attended the House of Commons on 11 June 2008 to support the government on a knife-edge vote on pre-charge detention periods, giving an interview in which he admitted to having had an operation for pleural mesothelioma; he declared his intention to stand for re-election. However, MacDougall died of mesothelioma at 6 AM on 13 August 2008 at the Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy.


IMO 4907000


Sturgeon v. Frost

Sturgeon v. Frost refers to two cases heard by the Supreme Court of the United States, both of which deal with the regulatory authority of the National Park Service over lands in Alaska under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). In the first case, "Sturgeon v. Frost I", 577 U.S. ___ (2016), the Court ruled that the National Park Service may regulate only "public" lands in Alaska and remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit Appeals Court to decide whether the river in question, which is "submerged land," is "public" or "non-public" land. In "Sturgeon v. Frost II", 587 U.S. ___ (2019), the Court unanimously ruled that the ANILCA defines navigable waters in Alaska as "non-public" lands and that they are exempt from the National Park Service's national regulations.
Background.
In establishing Alaska as a state, the US government recognized the need to protect much of the land in the state but without superseding the state's own control of these lands. The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, passed in 1980, was designed to balance the federal and the state interests in conservation. Effectively, the law designed a number of Conservation System Units (CSUs), which were designed as public land, and gave the National Park Service (NPS) the authority to manage the resources within the United States public lands within a CSU and could not regulate non-public lands (including those owned by the state, tribes, and private parties). Such resources were read to include water resources within a public CSU. That was added to a law signed by President Jimmy Carter in 1976 that gave the Department of the Interior and, through the NPS, the authority to regulate conduct of navigable waters within federally-designated national parks.
The case arose in 2007 when the Alaskan hunter John Sturgeon was informed by the National Park Service that he could not pilot his hovercraft along the portion of the Nation River that fell within the Yukon–Charley Rivers National Preserve, one of the CSUs covered by ANILCA. Alaska state law allows for the use of hovercraft in navigable waters, but the NPS had banned their use nationwide in public lands.
Sturgeon filed a lawsuit in which he argued that section 103(c) of the ANILCA restricted the National Park Service's jurisdiction over portions of the river that were owned by Alaska. Sturgeon was backed by the state since the ruling affected how the state could enforce ANILCA. The United States District Court for the District of Alaska ruled in favor of the Park Service, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed. The Ninth Circuit held that National Park Service regulations "applies to all federal-owned lands and waters administered by [the Park Service] nationwide, as well as all navigable waters lying within national parks," which allowed the NPS to regulate activities along the whole of the navigable portion of the Nation River even if it fell outside the CSU.
"Sturgeon v. Frost I".
In a unanimous opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit's ruling. Roberts characterized the Ninth Circuit's ruling as "a topsy-turvy approach" because the Ninth Circuit's interpretation of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act had been "ultimately inconsistent with both the text and context of the statute as a whole." Rejecting the Ninth Circuit's conclusions, Roberts held that the Act directs the Park Service to regulate "non-public" lands in Alaska according to "Alaska-specific provisions." Additionally, he wrote that "Section 103(c) draws a distinction between 'public' and 'non-public' lands within the boundaries of conservation system units in Alaska."
However, the Supreme Court did not rule on whether the Nation River constituted a "public land" for the purposes of the Act or whether the authority of the Park Service's regulations extend to "non-public" lands. To conduct further fact-finding with respect to those issues, the Supreme Court vacated the Ninth Circuit's ruling and remanded the case for further proceedings.
In his analysis of the case for "SCOTUSblog", Todd Henderson suggested that the Supreme Court avoided several key questions because "the stakes in this case are potentially huge" and that it wanted to "leave for another day the tough questions about federal power over lands in Alaska and perhaps elsewhere throughout the West."
"Sturgeon v. Frost II".
The Supreme Court remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit for further review. In the second hearing, the Circuit Court determined since the Nation River runs through a federal reservation, the federal government had inherent water rights on the river, which allowed the National Park Circuit's hovercraft ban to apply. A second petition for writ was filed with the Supreme Court that arguing that interpretation would mean that the federal government to have water rights on nearly any surface water running through federally-protected lands.
The case was heard on November 5, 2018, and the Court issued its unanimous decision on March 26, 2019 that reversed the Circuit Court's ruling by arguing that waterways were non-public lands and that the ANILCA had stripped away any jurisdiction that the National Park Service had over them.


Escape to the Country

Escape to the Country is a British daytime television reality property-buying/real estate programme, created by Talkback Thames, which premieres on network BBC One, produced by John Comerford and is repeated on BBC Two. It first aired on 14 October 2002 and also airs internationally in broadcast syndication.
In later years, production was transferred to Boundless Productions, a division of Fremantle Media.
Format.
The programme helps potential buyers find their dream home in the rural UK by showcasing three properties (including a mystery property) for inspection, then asking that week's guests to guess the market price. Episodes also feature information regarding the suburb presented, for example local industry and history.
Broadcast.
There are two versions of each episode produced - a shorter 45-minute version with only 3 houses shown and a longer 60-minute version. The short version usually airs on BBC One weekday afternoons (usually in the 15:00 slot) and the longer on BBC One weekdays at 10:00 or BBC Two evenings at 19:00. Repeat episodes are shown on HGTV.
Series 1 to 5.
Produced by Boundless, part of Fremantle UK, and aired from 2002, the premise of the show is that a person/family wishes to relocate from their current city home to a more peaceful and rural retreat. It is then the job of the show's presenter to find four houses for the family to view via laptop computer in their own homes. The family must then choose two out of the four houses to go and view for themselves. In addition, there is also the option of choosing the presenter's 'mystery house'.
Series 3 included a Catherine Gee episode starring actor/writer Ian Murphy, who was relocating from Nottingham to Lancaster.
Series 6 to 9.
The format of the show changed in series 6 to accommodate viewer demand to see more houses and more local information . Contributors now view all four houses, of which the fourth is the mystery house. The mystery house usually has something unique about it that will either make the contributors fall in love with or hate it. Added to the show is a taster day in which the contributors sample local delights, gain historical knowledge and visit local attractions to get a feel for the area they are planning to move to. Series 6 aired in August 2007 on BBC One, while series 7 and 8 aired back-to-back in autumn 2008. Series 9 began on 23 February in a new slot of 15:45 on BBC Two.
Series 10 to 12.
The format was modified again: the number of properties the couples viewed was reduced to three, with the third being the mystery house. Series 12 consisted of 75 shows and was broadcast from November 2011 on BBC Two with new title and credit sequences.
Series 13 to 20.
Series 13 premiered on 3 September 2012 on BBC One, followed by a further series each year; Series 20 began in late 2019.
In 2019, Series 19 was being broadcast and BBC One was re-running episodes of Series 18 on a daily basis. Presenters for these series included Sonali Shah, Jonnie Irwin, Ginny Buckley, Jules Hudson, Alistair Appleton, Margherita Taylor, and Nicki Chapman. For Series 19 the following credits were provided:
Presenters.
Over the years, presenters have included:
Spin-off and related shows.
A subsequent programme, "I Escaped to the Country", revisits potential buyers who had appeared on the primary series. Three series had been broadcast as of early 2019.
A related series featuring the same concept and some of the same presenters, but filmed in other countries, "Escape to the Continent" was also created for BBC by Boundless Productions. Two series had been broadcast as of early 2019, featuring international locations, like Portugal and Malta.
In early 2019, several news sources indicated that BBC would be commissioning a spinoff series, "Escape To the Perfect Town", featuring towns and cities instead of rural villages. This series began in 2019.
A further related series, "Greatest Escapes to the Country", looking back at homes featured in the primary series was broadcast on BBC Two in 2020.
Australian version.
"Escape from the City" is an Australian version of the show produced by Fremantle Media Australia and screening on the ABC from 3 January 2019. It is presented by: Jane Hall, Simon Marnie, Bryce Holdaway, Del Irani and Dean Ipaviz.
International broadcasts.
In Australia, "Escape to the Country" airs on Seven Network's free-to-air digital channel 7TWO, and the Lifestyle Channel on Foxtel Subscription TV.
In Canada, it is seen on CTV Life Channel as well as CBC. In Sweden, it airs on TV8.
In the Netherlands, "Escape to the Country" airs since April 2011 on SBS 6. Additionally, most viewers in the Netherlands can watch the show on the BBC channels that are distributed by cable operators. As a result of its availability in the Netherlands it features in the novel "The Detour".
In the United States, it was viewable on Netflix online streaming in March 2017 but has since been discontinued. As of March 2020, a limited number of episodes are available for streaming on Amazon Prime Video, in conjunction with IMDbTV. On Dabl, two episodes are broadcast weekday afternoons and rerun the same evening.
DVD releases.
On 5 March 2014, two DVDs were released in Australia by Shock Entertainment. Titled Series 20 Parts 1 & 2, the two DVDs box sets had a total of 19 discs.


Northern California Coastal Wild Heritage Wilderness Act

The Northern California Coastal Wild Heritage Wilderness Act is a U.S. federal law enacted in 2006 that enlarged existing wilderness boundaries and created new wilderness areas for protection under the National Wilderness Preservation System. These newly designated protected wilderness areas help safeguard habitat for more than 250 endangered species including the California condor and the bristlecone pine, the oldest living trees on earth.
It also added Wild and Scenic status to sections of the Black Butte River, created the Cow Mountain Recreation Area and designated the Elkhorn Ridge Potential Wilderness Area.
The Act was sponsored by Representative Mike Thompson and Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, and was signed into law on October 17, 2006.
Timeline.
May 21, 2002-
Senator Barbara Boxer introduces California Wild Heritage Act of 2002 (S. 2535) in the 107th United States Congress.
" In short, this bill preserves, prevents, and it protects." - Senator Boxer
March 27, 2003-
Bills are introduced in 108th Congress.
October 16, 2003-
Companion bills introduced in U.S. House of Representatives:
March 4, 2004-
Senator Dianne Feinstein joins Senator Boxer and Representative Mike Thompson in supporting the bill.
December 8, 2004-
U.S. Senate passes Senate bill 738, which was bundled together with several other bills collectively titled H.R. 620. It was then sent to the House for consideration, but the House adjourned before action was taken.
January 4, 2004-
January 14, 2005-
July 24, 2006-
Debate on bill for 40 minutes.
October 5, 2006-
Bill was presented to President of the United States.
October 17, 2006-
Bill is signed and becomes Public Law No. 109-362
References.
 The complete text of this law in PDF format. retrieved April 4, 2008
The Wilderness.net pages on each new / expanded wilderness areas, with detail of acreage by agency:
See also.
 San Francisco Chronicle's columnist Tom Steinstra's article (dated Oct. 2002) concerning fraud charges against Senator Boxer by mountain biking groups. retrieved April 4, 2008
 Press release of a working agreement between several mountain biking clubs and wilderness advocates, from a meeting held at Reno, Nevada on March 19-20, 2002


Manchester Airport plc v Dutton

 is an English land law case, concerning licences in land. It confirmed the court will attach to licences, even where narrowly drawn to avoid giving away title, a right to occupy provided it meets with the clear commercial purposes of the contract. This means those third parties, in this case protestors, who interfered with such rights must be removed.
Facts.
A second runway was being built and trees had to go on National Trust land. The National Trust gave Manchester Airport plc authority to let subcontractors enter. Mr Dutton and environmental protestors tried to stop the work in protest, and occupied the land. Manchester Airport plc had not put any people on site yet, but still claimed an injunction under Order 113 of the Rules of the Supreme Court for their removal.
Judgment.
Laws LJ held that although the licensee could remove the protestors, ejectment (court bailiffs to assist) under settled law could only be claimed by someone with title or an estate in land. Also, the licensee (the Airport) was not in occupation, and did not have title, so the court could not grant any of the other possessory remedies (in trespass and nuisance).
But given that the licensee had brought a claim in possession, the court would first consider the extent of licensee's actual or right to occupation arising out of any term of the licence contract. Then the court would consider any element of control arising out of the licence contract. Then the court would give such remedies as would vindicate the licensee's rights under the licence contract.
But the licensee must first bring its claim under CPR 55 (then Ord 113) possession proceedings. That is the first step. The court does not then give possession back to the licensee (as licensee had no possession that was disturbed in the first place). The licensee was never entitled to possession only mere occupation. Indeed, the licensee could never obtain possession as National Trust was prohibited from alienating any of its land in possession.
The court gave relief as would vindicate the construction contract. Such relief in this case included an injunction to remove the trespassers from the trees, possibly a (costs) award for the actual removal and other (mainly their legal advocates') costs (to be determined later) and an injunction that would prevent the protesters return.
Relief is given not to put licensee in possession but to vindicate (uphold) such rights of occupation as are given by the contract. The court uses the contract to determine the control that arises from the contract. It then couples that with the right of occupation and then proceeds to grant relief as would vindicate licensee's rights of occupation arising out of the contract.
Kennedy LJ concurred.
Chadwick LJ dissented. ‘In the latter case (which is this case) the plaintiff must succeed by the strength of his title, not on the weakness (or lack) of any title in the defendant.’


Omadacycline

Omadacycline, sold under the brand name Nuzyra, is a broad spectrum antibiotic medication belonging to the aminomethylcycline subclass of tetracycline antibiotics. In the United States, it was approved in October 2018, for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia and acute skin and skin structure infections.
"In vitro" studies.
"In vitro" studies have shown that omadacycline has activity against a broad range of Gram-positive and select Gram-negative pathogens. Omadacycline has potent "in vitro" activity against Gram-positive aerobic bacteria including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), penicillin-resistant and multi-drug resistant "Streptococcus pneumoniae", and vancomycin-resistant "Enterococcus". Omadacycline also has antimicrobial activity against common Gram-negative aerobes, some anaerobes, and atypical bacteria such as "Legionella" and "Chlamydia". This activity translated to potent efficacy for omadacycline in an "in vivo" systemic infection model in mice.
Additional "in vitro" and "in vivo" studies of omadacycline metabolism, disposition, and drug interactions show that omadacycline is metabolically stable (i.e., it does not undergo significant biotransformation) and neither inhibits nor interacts with metabolizing enzymes or transporters.
Mechanism of action.
The mechanism of action of omadacycline is similar to that of other tetracyclines – inhibition of bacterial protein synthesis. Omadacycline has activity against bacterial strains expressing the two main forms of tetracycline resistance (efflux and ribosomal protection).
Clinical trials.
A phase II study was conducted comparing the safety and efficacy of omadacycline to linezolid for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections. Patients were randomized at 11 sites in the US to receive either omadacycline 100 mg intravenously once daily with an option to transition to 200 mg orally once daily or linezolid 600 mg intravenously twice daily with an option to transition to 600 mg orally twice daily. The results indicated that omadacycline is well tolerated and has the potential to be an effective treatment in patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections.
In June 2013, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) designated the intravenous and oral formulations of omadacycline as a qualified infectious disease product in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia.
A 650 patient phase III registration study comparing omadacycline to linezolid for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections began in June 2015. Omadacycline met the primary efficacy endpoint of early clinical response with statistical non-inferiority (10% margin) compared to linezolid, and was generally safe and well tolerated. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were gastrointestinal side effects (18.0% for omadacycline vs. 15.8% for linezolid).
A 750 patient phase III study comparing omadacycline to moxifloxacin for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia began in November 2015. Omadacycline was statistically non-inferior to moxifloxacin at the early clinical response, 72 to 120 hours after therapy was initiated.
In May 2016, a phase Ib study of omadacycline in urinary tract infection was initiated.
In August 2016, a second phase III study of omadacycline was initiated in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, comparing the efficacy and safety of once-daily, oral omadacycline to that of twice-daily, oral linezolid. In July 2017, analysis of the data showed that all of the primary and secondary endpoints required for submission to the FDA and EMA were met. This was the third phase 3 registration study of omadacycline with favorable results.
Discovery.
Omadacycline was invented at Tufts University School of Medicine by a research team led by Mark L. Nelson with Mohamed Ismail while at Tufts and Kwasi Ohemeng and Laura Honeyman at Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Boston. The team applying their chemistry methods to the tetracycline scaffolds created over 3000 new derivatives, leading to the novel third generation compounds omadacycline and sarecycline.


Environmental impact of pesticides

The impact of pesticides consists of the effects of pesticides on non-target species. Pesticides are chemical preparations used to kill fungal or animal pests. Over 98% of sprayed insecticides and 95% of herbicides reach a destination other than their target species, because they are sprayed or spread across entire agricultural fields. Runoff can carry pesticides into aquatic environments while wind can carry them to other fields, grazing areas, human settlements and undeveloped areas, potentially affecting other species. Other problems emerge from poor production, transport and storage practices. Over time, repeated application increases pest resistance, while its effects on other species can facilitate the pest's resurgence.
Each pesticide or pesticide class comes with a specific set of environmental concerns. Such undesirable effects have led many pesticides to be banned, while regulations have limited and/or reduced the use of others. The global spread of pesticide use, including the use of older/obsolete pesticides that have been banned in some jurisdictions, has increased overall.
Agriculture and the environment.
The arrival of humans in an area, to live or to conduct agriculture, necessarily has environmental impacts. These range from simple crowding out of wild plants in favor of more desirable cultivars to larger scale impacts such as reducing biodiversity by reducing food availability of native species, which can propagate across food chains. The use of agricultural chemicals such as fertilizer and pesticides magnify those impacts. While advances in agrochemistry have reduced those impacts, for example by the replacement of long-lived chemicals with those that reliably degrade, even in the best case they remain substantial. These effects are magnified by the use of older chemistries and poor management practices.
History.
While concern for ecotoxicology began with acute poisoning events in the late 19th century; public concern over the undesirable environmental effects of chemicals arose in the early 1960s with the publication of Rachel Carson′s book, "Silent Spring". Shortly thereafter, DDT, originally used to combat malaria, and its metabolites were shown to cause population-level effects in raptorial birds. Initial studies in industrialized countries focused on acute mortality effects mostly involving birds or fish.
After the end of World War II, the United States shifted its industries from the wartime production of chemicals to synthetic agriculturally used pesticide creation, utilizing pyrethrum, rotenone, nicotine, sabadilla, and quassin as precursors to the expansive usage of pesticides in place today. Synthetic pesticides proved cheap and effective in killing insects, but garnered criticism from NGOs concerned about their effect on human health. In the years directly following World War II rose the creation and use of Aldrin (now banned in most countries), "dichlorodiphenyl trichloroethane (DDT) in 1939, Dieldrin, βBenzene Hexachloride (BHC), 2,4- Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), Chlordane and Endrin". In 2016, the United States consumed 322 million pounds of pesticides banned in the EU, 26 million pounds of pesticides banned in Brazil and 40 million pounds of pesticides banned in China, with most of banned pesticides banned staying constant or increasing in the United States over the past 25 years according to studies.
However, true data on pesticide usage remain scattered and/or not publicly available, especially worldwide (3). Some scholars argue the common practice of incident registration is inadequate for understanding the entirety of effects.
Since 1990, research interest has shifted from documenting incidents and quantifying chemical exposure to studies aimed at linking laboratory, mesocosm and field experiments. The proportion of effect-related publications has increased. Animal studies mostly focus on fish, insects, birds, amphibians and arachnids.
Since 1993, the United States and the European Union have updated pesticide risk assessments, ending the use of acutely toxic organophosphate and carbamate insecticides. Newer pesticides aim at efficiency in target and minimum side effects in nontarget organisms. The phylogenetic proximity of beneficial and pest species complicates the project.
One of the major challenges is to link the results from cellular studies through many levels of increasing complexity to ecosystems.
The concept (borrowed from nuclear physics) of a half-life has been utilized for pesticides in plants, and certain authors maintain that pesticide risk and impact assessment models rely on and are sensitive to information describing dissipation from plants. Half-life for pesticides is explained in two NPIC fact sheets. Known degradation pathways are through: photolysis, chemical dissociation, sorption, bioaccumulation and plant or animal metabolism. A USDA fact sheet published in 1994 lists the soil adsorption coefficient and soil half-life for then-commonly used pesticides.
Today, over 3.5 billion kilograms of synthetic pesticides are used for the world's agriculture in an over $45 billion industry. Current lead agrichemical producers include Syngenta (ChemChina), Bayer Crop Science, BASF, Dow AgroSciences, FMC, ADAMA, Nufarm, Corteva, Sumitomo Chemical, UPL, and Huapont Life Sciences. Bayer CropScience and its acquisition of Monsanto led it to record profits in 2019 of over $10 billion in sales, which herbicide shares growing by 22%, followed closely by Syngenta. While dubbed economic and ecologically sound practices by suppliers, the effects of agricultural pesticides can include toxicity, bioaccumulation, persistence, and physiological responses in humans and wildlife, and several international NGOs have risen in response to the economic activities of these larger, transnational corporations, such as Pesticide Action Network.
Air.
Pesticides can contribute to air pollution. Pesticide drift occurs when pesticides suspended in the air as particles are carried by wind to other areas, potentially contaminating them. Pesticides that are applied to crops can volatilize and may be blown by winds into nearby areas, potentially posing a threat to wildlife. Weather conditions at the time of application as well as temperature and relative humidity change the spread of the pesticide in the air. As wind velocity increases so does the spray drift and exposure. Low relative humidity and high temperature result in more spray evaporating. The amount of inhalable pesticides in the outdoor environment is therefore often dependent on the season. Also, droplets of sprayed pesticides or particles from pesticides applied as dusts may travel on the wind to other areas, or pesticides may adhere to particles that blow in the wind, such as dust particles. Ground spraying produces less pesticide drift than aerial spraying does. Farmers can employ a buffer zone around their crop, consisting of empty land or non-crop plants such as evergreen trees to serve as windbreaks and absorb the pesticides, preventing drift into other areas. Such windbreaks are legally required in the Netherlands.
Pesticides that are sprayed on to fields and used to fumigate soil can give off chemicals called volatile organic compounds, which can react with other chemicals and form a pollutant called tropospheric ozone. Pesticide use accounts for about 6 percent of total tropospheric ozone levels.
Water.
In the United States, pesticides were found to pollute every stream and over 90% of wells sampled in a study by the US Geological Survey. Pesticide residues have also been found in rain and groundwater. Studies by the UK government showed that pesticide concentrations exceeded those allowable for drinking water in some samples of river water and groundwater.
Pesticide impacts on aquatic systems are often studied using a hydrology transport model to study movement and fate of chemicals in rivers and streams. As early as the 1970s quantitative analysis of pesticide runoff was conducted in order to predict amounts of pesticide that would reach surface waters.
There are four major routes through which pesticides reach the water: it may drift outside of the intended area when it is sprayed, it may percolate, or leach through the soil, it may be carried to the water as runoff, or it may be spilled, for example accidentally or through neglect. They may also be carried to water by eroding soil. Factors that affect a pesticide's ability to contaminate water include its water solubility, the distance from an application site to a body of water, weather, soil type, presence of a growing crop, and the method used to apply the chemical.
United States regulations.
In the US, maximum limits of allowable concentrations for individual pesticides in drinking water are set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for public water systems. (There are no federal standards for private wells.) Ambient water quality standards for pesticide concentrations in water bodies are principally developed by state environmental agencies, with EPA oversight. These standards may be issued for individual water bodies, or may apply statewide.
United Kingdom regulations.
The United Kingdom sets Environmental Quality Standards (EQS), or maximum allowable concentrations of some pesticides in bodies of water above which toxicity may occur.
European Union regulations.
The European Union also regulates maximum concentrations of pesticides in water.
Soil.
The extensive use of pesticides in agricultural production can degrade and damage the community of microorganisms living in the soil, particularly when these chemicals are overused or misused as chemical compounds build up in the soil. The full impact of pesticides on soil microorganisms is still not entirely understood; many studies have found deleterious effects of pesticides on soil microorganisms and biochemical processes, while others have found that the residue of some pesticides can be degraded and assimilated by microorganisms. The effect of pesticides on soil microorganisms is impacted by the persistence, concentration, and toxicity of the applied pesticide, in addition to various environmental factors. This complex interaction of factors makes it difficult to draw definitive conclusions about the interaction of pesticides with the soil ecosystem. In general, long-term pesticide application can disturb the biochemical processes of nutrient cycling.
Many of the chemicals used in pesticides are persistent soil contaminants, whose impact may endure for decades and adversely affect soil conservation.
The use of pesticides decreases the general biodiversity in the soil. Not using the chemicals results in higher soil quality, with the additional effect that more organic matter in the soil allows for higher water retention. This helps increase yields for farms in drought years, when organic farms have had yields 20-40% higher than their conventional counterparts. A smaller content of organic matter in the soil increases the amount of pesticide that will leave the area of application, because organic matter binds to and helps break down pesticides.
Degradation and sorption are both factors which influence the persistence of pesticides in soil. Depending on the chemical nature of the pesticide, such processes control directly the transportation from soil to water, and in turn to air and our food. Breaking down organic substances, degradation, involves interactions among microorganisms in the soil. Sorption affects bioaccumulation of pesticides which are dependent on organic matter in the soil. Weak organic acids have been shown to be weakly sorbed by soil, because of pH and mostly acidic structure. Sorbed chemicals have been shown to be less accessible to microorganisms. Aging mechanisms are poorly understood but as residence times in soil increase, pesticide residues become more resistant to degradation and extraction as they lose biological activity.
Effect on plants.
Nitrogen fixation, which is required for the growth of higher plants, is hindered by pesticides in soil. The insecticides DDT, methyl parathion, and especially pentachlorophenol have been shown to interfere with legume-rhizobium chemical signaling. Reduction of this symbiotic chemical signaling results in reduced nitrogen fixation and thus reduced crop yields. Root nodule formation in these plants saves the world economy $10 billion in synthetic nitrogen fertilizer every year.
Pesticides can kill bees and are strongly implicated in pollinator decline, the loss of species that pollinate plants, including through the mechanism of Colony Collapse Disorder, in which worker bees from a beehive or western honey bee colony abruptly disappear. Application of pesticides to crops that are in bloom can kill honeybees, which act as pollinators. The USDA and USFWS estimate that US farmers lose at least $200 million a year from reduced crop pollination because pesticides applied to fields eliminate about a fifth of honeybee colonies in the US and harm an additional 15%.
On the other side, pesticides have some direct harmful effect on plant including poor root hair development, shoot yellowing and reduced plant growth.
Effect on animals.
Many kinds of animals are harmed by pesticides, leading many countries to regulate pesticide usage through Biodiversity Action Plans.
Animals including humans may be poisoned by pesticide residues that remain on food, for example when wild animals enter sprayed fields or nearby areas shortly after spraying.
Pesticides can eliminate some animals' essential food sources, causing the animals to relocate, change their diet or starve. Residues can travel up the food chain; for example, birds can be harmed when they eat insects and worms that have consumed pesticides. Earthworms digest organic matter and increase nutrient content in the top layer of soil. They protect human health by ingesting decomposing litter and serving as bioindicators of soil activity. Pesticides have had harmful effects on growth and reproduction on earthworms. Some pesticides can bioaccumulate, or build up to toxic levels in the bodies of organisms that consume them over time, a phenomenon that impacts species high on the food chain especially hard.
Birds.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that 72 million birds are killed by pesticides in the United States each year. Bald eagles are common examples of nontarget organisms that are impacted by pesticide use. Rachel Carson's book "Silent Spring" dealt with damage to bird species due to pesticide bioaccumulation. There is evidence that birds are continuing to be harmed by pesticide use. In the farmland of the United Kingdom, populations of ten different bird species declined by 10 million breeding individuals between 1979 and 1999, allegedly from loss of plant and invertebrate species on which the birds feed. Throughout Europe, 116 species of birds were threatened as of 1999. Reductions in bird populations have been found to be associated with times and areas in which pesticides are used. DDE-induced egg shell thinning has especially affected European and North American bird populations. From 1990 to 2014 the number of common farmland birds has declined in the European Union as a whole and in France, Belgium and Sweden; in Germany, which relies more on organic farming and less on pesticides the decline has been slower; in Switzerland, which does not rely much on intensive agriculture, after a decline in the early 2000s the level has returned to the one of 1990. In another example, some types of fungicides used in peanut farming are only slightly toxic to birds and mammals, but may kill earthworms, which can in turn reduce populations of the birds and mammals that feed on them.
Some pesticides come in granular form. Wildlife may eat the granules, mistaking them for grains of food. A few granules of a pesticide may be enough to kill a small bird. Herbicides may endanger bird populations by reducing their habitat.
Aquatic life.
Fish and other aquatic biota may be harmed by pesticide-contaminated water. Pesticide surface runoff into rivers and streams can be highly lethal to aquatic life, sometimes killing all the fish in a particular stream.
Application of herbicides to bodies of water can cause fish kills when the dead plants decay and consume the water's oxygen, suffocating the fish. Herbicides such as copper sulfate that are applied to water to kill plants are toxic to fish and other water animals at concentrations similar to those used to kill the plants. Repeated exposure to sublethal doses of some pesticides can cause physiological and behavioral changes that reduce fish populations, such as abandonment of nests and broods, decreased immunity to disease and decreased predator avoidance.
Application of herbicides to bodies of water can kill plants on which fish depend for their habitat.
Pesticides can accumulate in bodies of water to levels that kill off zooplankton, the main source of food for young fish. Pesticides can also kill off insects on which some fish feed, causing the fish to travel farther in search of food and exposing them to greater risk from predators.
The faster a given pesticide breaks down in the environment, the less threat it poses to aquatic life. Insecticides are typically more toxic to aquatic life than herbicides and fungicides.
Amphibians.
In the past several decades, amphibian populations have declined across the world, for unexplained reasons which are thought to be varied but of which pesticides may be a part.
Pesticide mixtures appear to have a cumulative toxic effect on frogs. Tadpoles from ponds containing multiple pesticides take longer to metamorphose and are smaller when they do, decreasing their ability to catch prey and avoid predators. Exposing tadpoles to the organochloride endosulfan at levels likely to be found in habitats near fields sprayed with the chemical kills the tadpoles and causes behavioral and growth abnormalities.
The herbicide atrazine can turn male frogs into hermaphrodites, decreasing their ability to reproduce. Both reproductive and nonreproductive effects in aquatic reptiles and amphibians have been reported. Crocodiles, many turtle species and some lizards lack sex-distinct chromosomes until after fertilization during organogenesis, depending on temperature. Embryonic exposure in turtles to various PCBs causes a sex reversal. Across the United States and Canada disorders such as decreased hatching success, feminization, skin lesions, and other developmental abnormalities have been reported.
Humans.
Pesticides can enter the body through inhalation of aerosols, dust and vapor that contain pesticides; through oral exposure by consuming food/water; and through skin exposure by direct contact. Pesticides secrete into soils and groundwater which can end up in drinking water, and pesticide spray can drift and pollute the air.
The effects of pesticides on human health depend on the toxicity of the chemical and the length and magnitude of exposure. Farm workers and their families experience the greatest exposure to agricultural pesticides through direct contact. Every human contains pesticides in their fat cells.
Children are more susceptible and sensitive to pesticides, because they are still developing and have a weaker immune system than adults. Children may be more exposed due to their closer proximity to the ground and tendency to put unfamiliar objects in their mouth. Hand to mouth contact depends on the child's age, much like lead exposure. Children under the age of six months are more apt to experience exposure from breast milk and inhalation of small particles. Pesticides tracked into the home from family members increase the risk of exposure. Toxic residue in food may contribute to a child's exposure. The chemicals can bioaccumulate in the body over time.
Exposure effects can range from mild skin irritation to birth defects, tumors, genetic changes, blood and nerve disorders, endocrine disruption, coma or death. Developmental effects have been associated with pesticides. Recent increases in childhood cancers in throughout North America, such as leukemia, may be a result of somatic cell mutations. Insecticides targeted to disrupt insects can have harmful effects on mammalian nervous systems. Both chronic and acute alterations have been observed in exposes. DDT and its breakdown product DDE disturb estrogenic activity and possibly lead to breast cancer. Fetal DDT exposure reduces male penis size in animals and can produce undescended testicles. Pesticide can affect fetuses in early stages of development, in utero and even if a parent was exposed before conception. Reproductive disruption has the potential to occur by chemical reactivity and through structural changes.
Persistent organic pollutants.
Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are compounds that resist degradation and thus remain in the environment for years. Some pesticides, including aldrin, chlordane, DDT, dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor, hexachlorobenzene, mirex and toxaphene, are considered POPs. Some POPs have the ability to volatilize and travel great distances through the atmosphere to become deposited in remote regions. Such chemicals may have the ability to bioaccumulate and biomagnify and can biomagnify (i.e. become more concentrated) up to 70,000 times their original concentrations. POPs can affect non-target organisms in the environment and increase risk to humans by disruption in the endocrine, reproductive, and respiratory systems.
Pest resistance.
Pests may evolve to become resistant to pesticides. Many pests will initially be very susceptible to pesticides, but following mutations in their genetic makeup become resistant and survive to reproduce.
Resistance is commonly managed through pesticide rotation, which involves alternating among pesticide classes with different modes of action to delay the onset of or mitigate existing pest resistance.
Pest rebound and secondary pest outbreaks.
Non-target organisms can also be impacted by pesticides. In some cases, a pest insect that is controlled by a beneficial predator or parasite can flourish should an insecticide application kill both pest and beneficial populations. A study comparing biological pest control and pyrethroid insecticide for diamondback moths, a major cabbage family insect pest, showed that the pest population rebounded due to loss of insect predators, whereas the biocontrol did not show the same effect. Likewise, pesticides sprayed to control mosquitoes may temporarily depress mosquito populations, they may result in a larger population in the long run by damaging natural controls. This phenomenon, wherein the population of a pest species rebounds to equal or greater numbers than it had before pesticide use, is called pest resurgence and can be linked to elimination of its predators and other natural enemies.
Loss of predator species can also lead to a related phenomenon called secondary pest outbreaks, an increase in problems from species that were not originally a problem due to loss of their predators or parasites. An estimated third of the 300 most damaging insects in the US were originally secondary pests and only became a major problem after the use of pesticides. In both pest resurgence and secondary outbreaks, their natural enemies were more susceptible to the pesticides than the pests themselves, in some cases causing the pest population to be higher than it was before the use of pesticide.
Prevalence.
Environmental modelling indicates that globally over 60% of global agricultural land (~24.5 million km²) is "at risk of pesticide pollution by more than one active ingredient", and that over 30% is at "high risk" of which a third are in high-biodiversity regions.
Eliminating pesticides.
Many alternatives are available to reduce the effects pesticides have on the environment. Alternatives include manual removal, applying heat, covering weeds with plastic, placing traps and lures, removing pest breeding sites, maintaining healthy soils that breed healthy, more resistant plants, cropping native species that are naturally more resistant to native pests and supporting biocontrol agents such as birds and other pest predators. In the United States, conventional pesticide use peaked in 1979, and by 2007, had been reduced by 25 percent from the 1979 peak level, while US agricultural output increased by 43 percent over the same period.
Biological controls such as resistant plant varieties and the use of pheromones, have been successful and at times permanently resolve a pest problem. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) employs chemical use only when other alternatives are ineffective. IPM causes less harm to humans and the environment. The focus is broader than on a specific pest, considering a range of pest control alternatives. Biotechnology can also be an innovative way to control pests. Strains can be genetically modified (GM) to increase their resistance to pests.
Activism.
Pesticide Action Network.
While dubbed economic and ecologically sound practices by suppliers, the effects of agricultural pesticides can include toxicity, bioaccumulation, persistence, and physiological responses in humans and wildlife, and several international NGOs have risen in response to the economic activities of these larger, transnational corporations, such as Pesticide Action Network. Historically, PAN's efforts have targeted the Dirty Dozen, resulting in treaties and global environmental law banning persistent organic pollutants (POPs) such as endosulfan, campaigns for Prior Informed Consent (PIC) for countries in the Global South for the right to know what hazardous and banned chemicals they are importing, resulting in the Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent which became law in 2004, and "shifting global aid away from pesticides" through community monitoring and serving as a watchdog for the World Bank policy failures, eventually co-authoring the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) and cementing agroecological knowledge and farming techniques are crucial to the future of agriculture.


Pereira accounting

Pereira accounting is one of the two manners in California community property law that explains how to deal with community funds and/or labor used to enhance the value of separate property. The method is named after a 1909 divorce case, "Pereira v. Pereira". To calculate, courts will add the original principal amount of the business which is separate property to a reasonable rate of return expected from the nature of that business. The result is considered separate property. The remaining amount of the business is considered part of the community. This method is preferred when the management of the spouse was the primary cause of the growth or productivity of the business. In the case where the character of the business is the main reason for its growth and production, Van camp accounting should be used.
Pereira is used when the appreciation of the business is due to the skills, efforts or talents of the spouse who is working in the business. In that case, the separate property is awarded the initial investment plus a reasonable interest rate, as if the capital had been invested. The remainder of the profits are community property. Typical businesses that would be considered for Pereira accounting: single person professions or very small businesses such as sole proprietorships, or businesses where the efforts of the owner-spouse comprise more than 50% of the labor to grow the company's value.
Choosing the correct apportionment or accounting method.
Pereira accounting is typically chosen when the business was spousal labor-intensive (typically smaller and/or labor-intensive businesses).
Van Camp accounting is typically chosen when the Business itself or economic factors produced the profits (typically larger and generally more capital intensive businesses).


Akmal Shaikh

Akmal Shaikh (5 April 1956 – 29 December 2009) was a Pakistani-British businessman who was convicted and executed in China for illegally trafficking approximately 4 kg of heroin. The trial and execution attracted significant media attention in the UK.
Shaikh was born in Pakistan and moved to the United Kingdom as a child. After a couple of failed businesses, Shaikh moved to Poland with his second wife in 2005 with the dream of starting an airline, and later of becoming a pop star. He travelled from Poland to China and was arrested by Chinese customs officers at Ürümqi Diwopu International Airport on 12 September 2007 with of heroin hidden in a compartment in his baggage. Shaikh's defence team pleaded ignorance of the existence of the drugs, although his lawyers said that the evidence against Shaikh was "overwhelming". Reprieve, an anti-death penalty organisation, argued that Shaikh suffered from mental illness which was exploited by criminals who tricked him into transporting the heroin on the promise of a recording contract.
Shaikh, who had never been assessed by mental health experts, denied he was mentally ill. He had requested a psychiatric evaluation to prove he was sane, but the requests were refused by Chinese authorities on the grounds that PRC laws required defendants to first provide past medical records showing evidence of a mental disorder before such evaluations could be undertaken. Appeals for clemency were made by his family and by British government officials. After two appeals, the Supreme Court confirmed the death sentence he was given at his first trial in October 2008, and Shaikh was executed by lethal injection in Ürümqi on 29 December 2009. It was reported that Shaikh was the first person with citizenship of a European country to be executed in China since Antonio Riva in 1951. Lau Fat-wai, a Portuguese citizen, also faced drug trafficking charges back in 2006, before Akmal Shaikh, but Mr. Lau's death sentence was only carried out early in 2013.
Britain made 27 official representations to the Chinese government; the Chinese ambassador to London was summoned twice to meet British Foreign Office ministers, once after the execution. Senior British politicians strongly condemned the execution, and were disappointed that clemency was not granted, while human rights groups and some Western legal experts in Chinese law criticised the lack of due process; United Nations Special Rapporteur Philip Alston said the refusal to assess Shaikh's mental health was a violation of international law. The Chinese embassy in Britain said Shaikh had no "previous medical record" of mental illness and that his "rights and interests were properly respected and guaranteed". It said the Chinese stance underlined the "strong resentment" felt by its public to drug traffickers, in part based on "the bitter memory of history" – a reference to the First and Second Opium Wars. A professor of criminal law at the East China University of Political Science and Law said the administration of the death penalty related to a country's history, culture and other conditions: "It's human nature to plead for a criminal who is from the same country or the same family, but judicial independence should be fully respected and everyone should be equal before the law."
Biography.
Shaikh, a Muslim, was a Pakistani migrant to the United Kingdom with his parents during his childhood. His first wife had converted from Hinduism to Islam when they married; they had two sons and a daughter. In the 1980s, Shaikh was an estate agent in the United States. They moved back to London when the business stumbled. He then started a mini-cab business in Kentish Town called 'Teksi' which prospered for a time; even so, he fell into bankruptcy for more than two years during the 1990s.
In 2003, Shaikh sexually harassed and unfairly dismissed a 24-year-old female employee; he also failed to pay more than half her wages. In 2004, an Employment Tribunal awarded her £10,255.97 damages and unpaid wages, which he subsequently never paid. Shaikh and his son, Abdul-Jabbar, both failed to attend the tribunal hearings for the harassment case and sold the business to another minicab firm. Shaikh's first marriage ended in divorce in 2004.
He married his Polish secretary – who was then pregnant with his child – and moved to Poland permanently in 2005, reportedly with ambitions to start an airline. He had been going to Lublin frequently since autumn 2004. Following the 7 July 2005 London bombings, Shaikh sent a text message to two people in London saying: "Now everybody will understand who Muslims are and what "jihad" is," and was consequently investigated as a terror suspect for five months by British intelligence and Poland's Internal Security Agency. In December 2005, the MI5 investigation was terminated due to insufficient evidence.
Shaikh's ex-wife reported him to Polish police for using threatening behaviour against her and her children; she later withdrew her statement, and the case never went to court. In 2006 he was sentenced by a Polish court to one year in jail (suspended for four years) for driving under the influence of alcohol, and prohibited from driving for three years. He was wanted in 2007 by a Lublin court for not paying alimony.
In 2007, he joined in a month-long demonstration for nurses outside the Warsaw office of the Prime Minister of Poland, and met British musician Gareth Saunders, according to whom Shaikh was destitute, living off handouts and ate at a soup kitchen. Chinese press reports that Saunders was told by Shaikh that he had started a business in Poland, before they met, but which he was forced to abandon due to a conspiracy against him. Shaikh wrote a song, "Come Little Rabbit", which Saunders said Shaikh pestered him and fellow Briton Paul Newberry into recording. Reprieve, an organisation working against the death penalty, campaigned for his release following his arrest in China. A recording of this 'out of tune' song, whose lyrics include a refrain 'Only one world, only one people, only one God', was released by Reprieve to raise awareness for their campaign to save him.
Drug trafficking, trials and execution.
Reprieve said Shaikh met a man in Poland named "Carlos" sometime in 2007 who he believed had contacts in the music industry and could help make him famous; Shaikh travelled to Kyrgyzstan, where a man named "Okole" promised Shaikh an opportunity to perform at a "huge nightclub" in China he purportedly owned. "Okole" and Shaikh travelled together to China, stopping in Tajikistan, where they stayed in a five-star hotel. On 12 September 2007, Shaikh flew from Dushanbe in Tajikistan, to Ürümqi in north-west China. Shaikh claimed he was told he would have to travel alone to China as the flight was full; "Okole" allegedly gave him a suitcase to carry, and promised he would take the next flight. Shaikh was arrested on his arrival at Ürümqi Airport the same day, when a baggage search revealed he was carrying of heroin of 84.2% purity; Alerted by Shaikh's nervous and circumspect behaviour, customs officers searched and found the drugs hidden in a compartment of his case, which was "practically empty" but for a few clothes; he only had US$100 and 100 Chinese yuan on his person. Reprieve said that Shaikh claimed the suitcase was not his; and he cooperated with the Chinese authorities in an attempt to catch "Okole", who was supposed to arrive on the next plane, but who never turned up. According to the British media, the British Government was informed of the arrest almost a year later.
Chen Dong, Director of the Ürümqi Legal Aid Center, was appointed to represent Shaikh, who was tried in November 2007. Defence asserted to the court that Shaikh knew nothing of the drugs, and that he did not knowingly smuggle the narcotics. Shaikh was found guilty. On 29 October 2008, after two failed appeals, he was sentenced to death by the Intermediate People's Court of Ürümqi according to the section of the Chinese criminal code which provides the death penalty for smuggling heroin in quantities of more than . The Supreme People's Court validated the sentence as being in accordance with Articles 48 and 347 of China's Criminal Law. "Prospect" says the judgement was made public in October 2008.
His case was heard in the second instance on 26 May 2009. At his second trial, Reprieve said Shaikh defended himself with a "rambling and often incoherent" speech lasting 50 minutes and which was "greeted with incredulity and sometimes mirth by court officials." According to the "Sanlian Living Weekly" article, one of the two lawyers representing Shaikh during his second trial, Mr. Cao Hong, said that the key defence argument was Shaikh's ignorance of the drug he was transporting. Cao said the official documents, baggage examination reports from the record of his arrest, as well as pictures and video footage taken during the baggage check was "overwhelmingly against Shaikh"; he did not play in court some of the video footage recorded because it was too incriminating. Cao advised Shaikh to undergo a mental evaluation, which he initially refused, arguing that he was not mentally ill. Upon his lawyer's insistence, he made a statement requesting an evaluation to prove that he was mentally sound, but which also said that neither he nor his family had any history of mental illnesses.
The Supreme People's Court ruled that documents provided by the British Embassy in Beijing and Reprieve in support of the request for a psychiatric assessment did not prove that Shaikh had a mental disorder; nor was there a history of mental disease in his family. His lawyer, Cao, confirmed that the documents he received from Reprieve contained "medical information about bipolar disorder, and a list of symptoms and case studies" not specific to Shaikh. According to Professor Jerome A. Cohen, professor emeritus at New York University School of Law, Shaikh's November trial lasted half an hour; he also said that the trial court initially agreed to allow a psychiatric evaluation of Shaikh, but subsequently refused it. Xinhua stated that the court's decision to refuse a mental assessment was based on PRC laws requiring defendants to first provide past medical records showing evidence of a mental disorder before such evaluations could be undertaken. Xinhua also reported the Supreme People's Court's view that medical records provided by the British Embassy contained no documentary evidence to support claims of Shaikh's condition. Although the Chinese authorities state he was provided with interpretation during his trials, "The Guardian" alleges there was none; and the Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, too intimated that interpretation may have been inadequate.
A final appeal to the Supreme People's Court for an independent assessment of his mental condition failed on 21 December 2009, and his execution date was set for 29 December. Shaikh was not told of his impending execution throughout this time "for humanitarian reasons". Shaikh was visited by two cousins and British consular officials in the hospital where he had been treated for a heart condition since August 2009, and it was only then that he was informed that he would die in 24 hours.
Shaikh was executed by lethal injection at 10:30 CST (02:30 GMT) on 29 December 2009 at the Xishan Detention Centre in Ürümqi. Family members and British consular officials were refused access to Shaikh during the final hours by the Chinese authorities, and were not allowed to witness the execution. According to Reprieve, Shaikh was the first national of an EU member state to be executed in China in over 50 years. Officials say he was given a Muslim burial – his body intact – according to his family's wishes, at the Guslay Muslim Cemetery; his family was not allowed to attend.
Clemency campaign.
Campaigners on his behalf alleged a lack of due legal process. They did not dispute that he was carrying a large amount of heroin, but argued for the release of Shaikh based on their assertions that he was mentally ill at the time of the offence saying that the court did not take his condition into account during the trial. The case attracted support from Amnesty International; and UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, Philip Alston, who said there were "strong indications" that Shaikh may have been suffering from mental illness. He also said: "Both Chinese and international law clearly indicate that a person who committed a crime while suffering from significant mental illness should not be subjected to the death penalty," and that "[e]xecuting a mentally ill man would be a major step backwards for China."
His family, which had lost touch with him when he left for Poland, also pleaded for mercy: in a letter to the Chinese Ambassador, his elder brother Akbar wrote that his brother's life had been destroyed by mental illness; Akbar maintained that Shaikh was kind and harmless when healthy, and was much loved by his family. He was concerned at the effect his execution would have on their mother: "She is a frail woman, and our family have not been able to break the news to her that she may lose her youngest child next week." Akmal's children said their father had been "seriously ill for much of his life", and pleaded for a reprieve.
Reprieve and his family all cite examples of Shaikh's "erratic behaviour" and "questionable decisions" at least since 2001. Reprieve interviewed people who had dealings with him to support their claims that he may have had bipolar disorder. Stephen Fry was one celebrity who joined the campaign for clemency. Reprieve also released hundreds of emails that Shaikh had sent in 2007 to embassy staff in Warsaw and to a group of 74 individuals and organisations including Tony Blair. Campaigners argued that Shaikh's delusions of pop stardom were symptomatic of his condition, and may have made him especially susceptible to confidence tricks. Akmal's former solicitor described his client as "charming and charismatic". The lawyer said that "By the time he went over to Poland you could not even sit down and have a conversation with him." Nevertheless, Shaikh had never been assessed by a psychiatrist in Britain or elsewhere.
Dr Peter Schaapveld, clinical and forensic psychologist engaged by Reprieve, was sent to China but was not allowed direct access to Shaikh. However, through 15 minutes' access given to Foreign Office officials to interview Shaikh, Dr Schaapveld said he was able to deduce "with 99 per cent certainty" that Shaikh was suffering from a mental disorder, possibly bipolar or schizophrenia. In an op-ed in the "South China Morning Post", Professor Jerome A. Cohen suggested that China had failed to comply with its own and international legal standards that required a thorough mental evaluation of Shaikh before rendering a final judgment.
The "China Daily" said: "Intellectually challenged people do a lot of inexplicable things when they lose control... But seldom have we heard of a mentally ill person hiding as much as 4 kg of heroin in his double-layered suitcase." It added that "the court had no reason not to consider the plaintiff's alleged mental illness if he showed any signs of suffering from it while he was in jail." It further asserted that the claims of his family were contradicted by Shaikh himself, who denied having a history of mental disorder. Wang Mingliang, professor of criminal law in Fudan University, and professor Xue Jinzhan, professor of criminal law at the East China University of Political Science and Law, stated that "the Chinese court's decision to execute Akmal Shaikh was completely appropriate ... [and] the denial of mental evaluation was legitimate and consistent with legal precedent". Xue Jinzhan said the administration of the death penalty related to a country's history, culture and other conditions: "It's human nature to plead for a criminal who is from the same country or the same family, but judicial independence should be fully respected and everyone should be equal before the law"; Wang said it was understandable that British media ran emotional stories and local people reacted with sorrow or anger as Britain did not retain the death penalty. "But one country should respect judicial independence of another country, without any interference in internal affairs."
Britain made 27 official representations to the Chinese government about the case. Gordon Brown reportedly wrote several times to Hu Jintao and pleaded the case personally to Wen Jiabao during the Copenhagen summit. The Chinese ambassador in London was summoned twice by the government over the case. The Chinese Embassy in London cited their country's obligations to the United Nations Conventions against Illicit Drug Trafficking as justification for punishing the "grave crime" of drug smuggling. The embassy statement asserted that Shaikh's rights and interests under Chinese law were "properly respected and guaranteed".
When his cousins, Soohail and Nasir Shaikh, arrived in Ürümqi to spend time with him at the hospital in Ürümqi the day before the execution, they also made a last-minute petition to the local court for a stay of execution; they and British embassy officials delivered a plea for mercy to president Hu Jintao. It was during this visit that Akmal was informed of his impending death.
Reaction.
Human rights organisations condemned China's refusal to consider Shaikh's alleged psychological illness as a denial of justice. However, some British commentators were largely sympathetic to, if not supportive of, the hard-line Chinese stance against drug smuggling, and accepted there was little else the British Government could do; some accused British leaders of hypocrisy in light of the country's own drugs problem.
The Chinese authorities reacted angrily to the "foreign interference", citing "the bitter memory" of China under foreign imperialism; and stressing that all legal procedures to safeguard the defendant had been complied with. The Chinese public was cited as being overwhelmingly in support of the execution, further justified by endorsement of its action in the British press.
Reprieve, the group which mounted his campaign, said they had passed on new evidence and testimonials from six people who knew Akmal in Poland that they had received in the final 24 hours which the Chinese government had not acknowledged receiving at the time of the execution. Sally Rowan, their legal director, said that any talk of 'special treatment' was "ridiculous"– as Chinese law has provisions to protect those with mental illness, but they chose not to invoke them. Rowan condemned the execution of an incompetent man as "barbaric". Other mental health charities echoed the sentiments.
Shaikh's family was saddened by the execution, but was split as to whether the UK establishment had done all it could to secure humanitarian treatment. Shaikh's cousins Soohail and Nasir Shaikh praised the efforts of Gordon Brown, British ministers and Reprieve. Two other cousins, Amina and Ridwan Shaikh, attacked the government and the media in a scathing letter to "The Guardian" that questioned the effectiveness of the government's approach. They criticised the "sporadic media attention" about their cousin's plight for two years, and accused the government of acting out its powerlessness in the face of China's economic might.
United Kingdom.
Following the execution, there was a range of views in the British press, some agreed with the political leaders Gordon Brown, David Miliband and David Cameron, who expressed concerns that a mental health assessment was not done, and that clemency requests had not been granted; others were critical of the UK government's reaction; and some were fairly neutral. Among the journalists who supported the UK government's stance were Dominic Ziegler, author of "The Economist"'s Banyan column on Asian affairs, who felt that the issue raised questions about effective use of protections for defendants during judicial process; and Daniel Korski, who wrote in "The Spectator" that he felt that China was "a revanchist power" seeking the status and rights of the Western world, though not the responsibilities – "Prospect" magazine held a similar opinion that the Chinese authorities wished to "stand up to its old oppressors" and show the Chinese people that they were "being led in the right direction."
An editorial in "The Independent" noted that some other Asian countries impose the death penalty for drug-smuggling, and commented that the execution "was less the arrogance of a rising power than evidence that China is still feeling its way in the wider world". George Walden wrote in "The Times" that he felt if the British government had been more discreet Shaikh might have been reprieved, and that "if we wish to influence China on capital punishment, a little historical humility may be in order". British commentators critical of the UK government's response were Josephine McDermott of "The Daily Telegraph" who compared the government's "sabre-rattling" approach to the British attitude during the First Opium War in 1839; Michael White of "The Guardian", who felt that China would not be interested in "lectures from Europeans on the morality of the drugs trade", and Leo McKinstry of the "Daily Mail", who said the international clamour to denounce China was "hypocritical and insensitive". Tony Parsons of the "Daily Mirror" supported China's strong stance against drug peddling, and said the British government's reaction was "shrill beyond belief".
People's Republic of China.
Official view.
Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Jiang Yu said, "Nobody has the right to speak ill of China's judicial sovereignty. We express our strong dissatisfaction and opposition to the British Government's unreasonable criticism of the case. We urge the British to correct their mistake in order to avoid harming China–UK relations." The Chinese Embassy in London said "The legal structures of China and UK may be different, but it should not stand in the way of enhancing our bilateral relations on the basis of mutual respect." Further, the Embassy cited "the bitter memory" of the Opium trade of the 19th century as a reason for the "strong resentment" felt by the Chinese public to drug traffickers and foreign (especially British) interference. A biannual summit session between China and the UK on human rights scheduled for early January was "postponed" by China in what "The Daily Telegraph" said was "widely thought to be a rebuke to the UK for its public criticism of China over the execution of Akmal Shaikh".
Other views.
The majority of people in China supported Shaikh's execution. An online survey by "China Daily" showed 77.5% in favour of the execution and 16% opposing. Vocal supporters included overseas Chinese, legal specialists, government officials as well as journalists. A professor at the Shanghai Institute for European Studies accused Labour politicians of trying to capitalise on the issue of China's human rights for political advantage in the upcoming election. An academic at Fudan University said the British criticism lacked legal and moral basis; their reaction was "unreasonable" and showed "considerable cultural arrogance"; another one at Tsinghua University considered the British politicians' reaction an attempt to "create sentiments and manipulate the public". Wang Dawei, a professor at China People's Public Security University, said that Britain and China should respect each other's differences in ideology and moral standards, rather than "using their own moral standards to judge, condemn and demonise China." Citing polls and comments on websites of British press, the Chinese media also reported how politicians' outcry was "unrepresentative" of the vast majority of Britons' understanding of and support for China's action.
In an editorial published by China Daily, Han Dongping, Professor of History and Political Science at Warren Wilson College, hailed the execution, saying that the decision "upheld the dignity of Chinese law." He suggested that to act otherwise as a result of international pressure would be a return to the extraterritorial privileges that had been granted to many foreign nationals in China in the latter half of the 19th and first half of the 20th century pursuant to the "unequal treaties". Han said that a nation bending its laws under outside pressure "invites endless troubles in the future", leading to a lack of respect for the laws of that country, and dismissed the criticism of China's human rights record by Western governments as "an excuse to intervene in China’s internal affairs".
International reaction.
Some public organisations and individual experts media were critical of the judicial process. The United Nations Special Rapporteur, Philip Alston, a human rights spokesman, felt that the brevity of the initial conviction might not have allowed due process, and that not assessing Shaikh's mental health was "in violation not only of Chinese law but also international law." The European Union condemned the execution and regretted that its calls for the sentence to be commuted had not been heeded. Amnesty International felt the execution highlighted the injustice of the death penalty, particularly in China, and called on all countries to press the Chinese government to improve the legal proceedings for defendants, especially those facing the death penalty. Jerome Cohen, an expert in Chinese law, commented in the US-Asia Law Institute that the main legal issue was the refusal of a psychiatric examination, and that China may review its judicial process in this regard both in light of international criticism, and internal pressure as the country "shares the world’s abhorrence of punishing mentally irresponsible people" and after the execution of Yang Jia, who was also refused a psychiatric examination, the public sympathy prompted "some Chinese experts to seek necessary law reforms".
Reaction from the international media was broadly critical of the authorities, with "Der Spiegel" summarising German commentators as being universally critical of Beijing. "Newsweek" felt that the Chinese authorities had consolidated their position domestically by giving the impression to Chinese citizens that the government will "protect them the best way it knows how from the mentally unstable, whether they are carrying machetes or suitcases full of drugs", and Ireland's "Sunday Independent" felt that the West was being hypocritical for overlooking other human rights concerns in China while enjoying the Beijing Olympics.
Notes.
"Come Little Rabbit" – video of the song which Reprieve says was recorded by Akmal Shaikh (on reprieve.org).


Zheng Xiaoyu

Zheng Xiaoyu (; December 10, 1944July 10, 2007) was the director of the State Food and Drug Administration of the People's Republic of China from 2003 to 2005. He was sentenced to death for corruption and allowing possibly tainted products in Mainland China in the first instance trial at Beijing No.1 Intermediate Court on May 29, 2007. He was executed on July 10, 2007.
Biography.
Born in Fuzhou, Fujian on December 10, 1944, Zheng Xiaoyu eventually studied to receive his bachelor's degree in biology from Fudan University in 1968. He joined the Communist Party of China in November 1979.
Zheng was director of the State Pharmaceutical Administration from 1994 to 1998, head of the State Drug Administration from 1998 to 2003, and director of the State Food and Drug Administration from 2003 to 2005.
In May 2007, Zheng was convicted of taking bribes and dereliction of duty and sentenced to death by a trial court in Beijing. These corrupt practices are believed to have led to 40 deaths in Panama from cough syrup that contained diethylene glycol in place of glycerin. Zheng had been convicted of personally approving unproven and unsafe medicines after taking bribes from eight pharmaceutical companies while working as the former head of China's ministry of food and drug safety, bribes totaling more than 6.49 million RMB (or a rough equivalent of 850,000 USD), approvals which resulted in at least a hundred patient deaths, directly and indirectly. It was also discovered that during the eight-year period of drug oversight, Zheng personally ordered approvals of more than 150,000 new medicines, a number 134-times that of the U.S. FDA (which approves, on average, ca. 140 new medicines annually). Most of those 150,000 medicines were the products of the eight pharmaceutical companies that bribed Zheng. A single unsafe medication of Anhui Hua Yuan () Company, since closed, resulted in 14 patient deaths, hundreds being permanently disabled, and several thousand more falling seriously ill; Anhui Hua Yuan's CEO committed suicide before his arrest. Zheng's trial resulted in a death sentence.
Cao Wenzhuang, a former director of the same agency's department dealing with drug registrations was also sentenced to death in the first week of July, 2007, for dereliction of duty and accepting bribes. Cao had accepted more than two million RMB (or a rough equivalent of 250,000 USD). Cao received a two-year "reprieve" for his death sentence, "a ruling that usually [results in the death sentence being] commuted to life in prison if the convict is deemed to have reformed."
Zheng entered an appeal for leniency on June 12, saying that the sentence was "too severe" citing the fact that he had confessed his crimes and cooperated with investigators. However, the court ruled that he was a "great danger" to the country and its reputation. The appeal was rejected on June 22 and he was executed on July 10, 2007. Lethal Injection was used for the execution.


David R. Boyd


NOx Law (Japan)

Amendment Act on Reduction of Total Amount of Nitrogen Dioxide and Particulate Matters Originating from Automobiles in Designated Areas (introduced on 3 June 1992, amended on 19 June 2001) is environmental legislation in Japan.
Background.
The Act sets the maximum emissions of nitrogen dioxide () and particulate matters(PMs) allowed by trucks, buses, and diesel passenger vehicles. Complying with this standard has become a requirement to pass the Motor-vehicle inspection (Japan) which is necessary to register cars.
The Act is based on the 1992 law that was aimed at the reduction of nitrogen dioxide emissions from diesel vehicles. Further research revealed that particulate matters pose serious cancer risk to the human body. The Act was amended in 2001 to include PMs and enlarged the geographical areas under the regulation.
Criticism.
Critics argued the law cannot stop dirty cars from coming into the regulated areas, as they would simply register the cars at municipalities that are not covered under the law. To patch this loophole, prefectural governments have set up bylaws (local ordinance) that prohibit non-complying cars to use the roads in their jurisdictions.


Leonard Miles

Leonard James Miles GC (27 January 1904 – 21 September 1940) was an ARP warden who was posthumously awarded a George Cross for the gallantry he showed in leaving his air raid shelter to warn others of a nearby unexploded bomb in Hainault in Essex on 21 September 1940. He was by trade a building contractor.
21/22 September 1940.
ARP Warden Leonard Miles was on duty on the night of 21/22 September 1940 when a Luftwaffe air raid on Ilford commenced. James observed that a parachute mine was falling near his home on Lime Grove, in Hainault, East London. Though he could have safely retreated to a public shelter, he ran towards the danger, in order to warn some people, whom he knew to be in their houses.
Miles was mortally wounded when the mine exploded, but was still conscious, but refused first aid from another warden. He instructed that a nearby fire which had been caused by a broken gas main be attended to first.
He was taken to the King George Hospital in Ilford but died about 24 hours later. He was cremated on 26 September 1940, and his ashes were scattered in the City of London Cemetery on the same day.
George Cross citation.
Notice of his award appeared in the London Gazette on 17 January 1941.


Jillian Armsbury

Jillian Armsbury was a singer, performer, songwriter and occasional activist, originally from Washington state. She was a pioneer in the Charanga R&B music genre. She was the lead singer of the Latin group Los Jovenes del Barrio. She had worked with the latin jazz percussionist, Mongo Santamaria, singing on an album of his which was released in the late 1980s. She was the co-composer of "Do You Want My Love" which was a hit for CoCo Lee, which appeared on Lee's album "Just No Other Way". She was married to bandleader Johnny Almendra and then later session musician Leon Pendarvis.
Background.
Armsbury was born and raised in Washington State and Oregon and was of German, English, and Scottish ancestry. Her father married a black woman when she was three, so her family was also black. At the age of nine she was doing community theater. A formally trained dancer, she studied dance for some years. Later wanting to do New York Broadway work she realized that dancers were also singing so that led her to study music and singing. She grew up listening to Aretha Franklin, Otis Redding, James Brown, John Coltrane and Motown.
Armsbury was married to Johnny Almendra who founded Los Jovenes Del Barrio. At the time of their interview with George Rivera of Jazz Con Clave, they had been together for ten years. She was also married to "Saturday Night Live" music director Leon Pendarvis, who she remained married to until her death.
Career.
An article by Jessica Lynne Valiente of the Graduate Center, City University of New York credits Armsbury with the compositions that she contributed, and the artistic persona in her performances for creating a Latin / R&B fusion that was more successful than anything that had ever been tried during the boogaloo era or following it. The group Los Jovenes del Barrio she was in was one of the most important bands in the New York bands in the New York Latin music scene, pushing the barriers as well as extending the musical shape.
1980s - 1990s.
Armsbury appeared on the "Olé Ola" album by Mongo Santamaria which was released in 1989. She sang lead on the title song", the Diane Bulgarelli composition Olé Ola" as well having some involvement with Santamaria's composition "La Tumba".
In 1996, Los Jovenes Del Barrio released their "Evolucionando" album. The "Billboard" reviewer noted her shining performances on the songs "Telephone" and "Stop Slow Down". A similar review was given by "Cashbox" in the February 10th issue. With the group's experimentation with various Afro-Cuban styles, jazz and R&B, it caused a sensation. In May 1998, along with Baby Zilla, she was appearing at the Downtime in New York.
She co-composed the song "Do You Want My Love" which was a hit for Coco Lee in New Zealand and Australia in 1999 making the top 20 in both countries.
2000s.
Armsbury provided background vocals on Rosie O'Donnell's "Another Rosie Christmas" album which was released in 2000. She also did background vocal work for the Swedish group Play on their 2003 album, "Playin' Around". In May 2007, she was a guest performer with Julia Wade in her Julia Wade in A Canvas of Colors show at the Laurie Beechman Theatre. She contributed a rap to the "Everybody Get Down" by Funk Filharmonik, which was released in 2008.
Activism.
In 2000, Armsbury volunteered with the Shadow Convention of 2000. She performed with the children’s chorus who were the children orphaned as a result of parents being imprisoned in the war on drugs.
In 2001, Armsbury was the spokes-woman for the United Musicians Front, a 50-member group of musicians who were protesting against radio stations which included La Mega, who had gone too far to the commercial side and lost touch with the people in New York.
In 2008, Armsbury came to the Southeast Missouri State University at the request of its musical director Judith Farris to speak to the students. She shared with them her experience with cancer.
Death.
Armsbury died in January 2009 of mesothelioma which was from exposure to asbestos.
In 2009, the Southeast Missouri State University's Department of Theatre and Dance and students dedicated their "Sweet Charity" musical production to Armsbury. A concert was held in her memory which was in conjunction with the Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation.