Obligatory disclaimer: I am not involved in any American litigation; this answer is for my personal interest only. [[User:Eliyohub|Eliyohub]] ([[User talk:Eliyohub|talk]]) 10:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Obligatory disclaimer: I am not involved in any American litigation; this answer is for my personal interest only. [[User:Eliyohub|Eliyohub]] ([[User talk:Eliyohub|talk]]) 10:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
== Massachusetts became the sixth state admitted into the United States? ==
Wikipedia's front page says that on this date in 1788, Massachusetts ratified the [[Constitution of the United States]] and became the sixth state admitted into the Union. This doesn't seem right to me. The US Constitution didn't go into affect until 2/3rds of the then 13 states ratified the Constitution. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that while Massachusetts was the 6th state to ratify the constitution, the first 9 all entered the US at the same time? In fact, even that seems wrong since before the Constitution, the US was governed by the [[Articles of Confederation]] which Massachusetts ratified in 1778. I think most people would recognize that Massachusetts became part of the US on July 4th, 1776 when the United States [[United States Declaration of Independence|declared independence from Great Britain]]. I'm not sure if the concept of "admission" to the Union even makes sense for the first 13 colonies since the United States didn't exist for them to be admitted into it. [[User:A Quest For Knowledge|A Quest For Knowledge]] ([[User talk:A Quest For Knowledge|talk]]) 11:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Revision as of 11:23, 6 February 2024
Welcome to the humanities section of the Wikipedia reference desk.
The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
It occurs to me that Alberta's major population centres are farther north than those of any other province. Based on Google Maps, it looks like all of Canada's provincial capitals and other major cities (except in Alberta) lie within 100km of the US border, except for some in the Maritimes that are too far east, but still aren't much farther north than northern Maine. Aside from cities in the Calgary-Edmonton corridor, the largest two entries on List of census metropolitan areas and agglomerations in Canada north of Calgary are Saskatoon, SK (population 317,000) and Prince George, BC (90,000). Calgary#Ethnicity shows that there were almost 900,000 residents there in 2001, so while it's grown significantly in the last couple of decades, the region was still far more populous than anything else so far north.
So...why are Alberta's major population centres so much farther north? I didn't see anything in Edmonton or Calgary or Calgary–Edmonton Corridor to explain it. Calgary's article mentions its earlier oil-and-gas history, and the corridor's article mentions recent growth due to oil-and-gas, but the first boom was a century ago (plenty of time for people to leave after the boom), and the second is quite recent; the region could have shrunk hugely after the first boom and before the second, but apparently it was still far larger than anything else (except Edmonton) so far north. Nyttend (talk) 01:46, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose climate matters too. The farther east you go, the colder it gets. Alberta, although still pretty cold in winter, is more suited for agriculture than the same latitude in Québec or Ontario. PiusImpavidus (talk) 09:46, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To the point about terrain -- if you are in Vancouver and need to travel overland to Winnipeg for example, there are still only two "direct" routes, nboth of them winding through moumtain passes, and it was only a year or two ago that both were shut down by various natural disasters and people who needed to do this had to go through the United States Elinruby (talk) 03:48, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Universities in Middle East History B.A. M.A. programs
Which university in which country offers History as a Bachelor's and a Master's in Arts programs in the Middle East? and I asking only in the Gulf countries. If not, why? is it because the History subject itself can make a person un-Islamic or something? and if that is case, which university offers Islamic studies in Bachelor's and Master's? Donmust90 (talk) 16:35, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Historic multiple births
Assuming that the story of Romulus and Remus is just mythology, what is the earliest known case of twins born in a royal or other important family, with reliable sources to support it? What about triplets or higher multiple births?
Also, has the development of modern medicine and nutrition increased the frequency of twin births since ancient times?
Setting aside unethical practices of the IVF industry, I don't see how the development of modern medicine and nutrition would have affected the relative frequency of multiple pregnancy. It has led to a higher success rate of medical interventions in problematic birth giving, and the impact may have been more pronounced for multiple pregnancy with its higher incidence of complications. --Lambiam23:33, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, let me adjust the question to: Has the frequency of twin births increased since ancient times? For how far back are statistics on this available? --142.112.220.136 (talk) 03:29, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Birth records which include the mother's name and a rough place and date of birth (within a few months) could likely be used to estimate the number of live births involving multiple pregnancies but I don't know if anyone has every tried to study this. AFAIK in most cases these only go back a few centuries at best. Note that while baptism records are sometimes used to estimate dates of birth, I quite doubt these will be precise enough to be that useful in estimating frequency of multiple pregnancies. While it was fairly common to baptise soon after birth historically, this did vary [2]. And even where it was the norm to baptise soon after birth, I don't think you can assume two children from the same mother being baptised at the same time were definitely twins (or whatever) as opposed to babies born at different times where for whatever reason one was baptised late for the time period. If you restrict yourself to subsets of the population where possibly better records exist of dates of birth like royalty or the upper class, you might be able to come up with estimates for those particular populations. Nil Einne (talk) 09:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bear in mind that only living children were baptised. Stillbirths and those who died prior to baptism will not show up in baptismal registers. Even after civil registration was introduced, you will need to check the laws in the relevant territories as to whether stillbirths were recorded. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Back to the adjusted question: there's a difference between the frequency of multiple pregnancy and of multiple birth. I can't speak to the frequency of multiple pregnancy (as Lambiam notes, it's unlikely to have been affected), but improved care for the unborn and for the mother has a significant chance of increasing the rate of multiple births. Carrying and bearing a singleton is dangerous enough — consider the frequency of maternal death without modern medicine — and carrying and bearing multiple infants is likely to be more dangerous, given the additional space they occupy in the mother's body. Multiple pregnancies are considered higher risk, after all, and the pregnant woman who dies can't bear any of the children, except in occasional situations assisted by modern techniques. The only suggestion I have to the contrary is that of abortion; only in the last century has there been any possibility (I assume) of knowing that a pregnancy is multiple, let alone possible to kill one or more unborn children while sparing one. Nyttend (talk) 18:40, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My question about statistics was "For how far back are statistics on this available?"; I didn't ask "From what sort of records might statistics be compiled or have been compiled?" In other words, what was the first time someone published a number like "There seems to be one set of twins for every N single births?" Just curious, but this is not information I've ever seen. --142.112.220.136 (talk) 20:45, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The picture is of John W. Spellman (Q73811549), but can anyone work out what the text says (I'm not sure I can even make out the second letter of the middle word) and what it means, in what language? (BTW, amazingly, historian Paul Dorpat, despite being in a nursing home with moderate dementia, was able to say that the picture -- which he published 57 years ago -- was of a University of Washington professor, which turned out to be all the context I needed for identification. So, despite his condition, Paul is still a useful resource on Seattle history. & thanks to fellow Seattle historian Valarie Bunn for thinking to ask him.) - Jmabel | Talk22:48, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Since he was a distant cousin of Queen Marie Antoniette, his big hathed for the French Revolution and Napoleonic Empire, against whom he fought until the end, was also a personal revenge for her death beyond for his loyalty to the ancien regime? -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.25.171.207 (talk) 16:31, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was telling a story yesterday: on my way home one autumn afternoon from primary school, in Letchworth in England in the early 1980s, the air-raid siren went off, terrifyingly. And though of course we didn't die four minutes later as we'd expected, we never heard an explanation.
Someone listening pointed out that this coincides neatly with Able Archer 83. Now I'm curious. I understand how jumpy the government was at the time, but surely there'd be some record of an accidental warning?
I thought it might have been mentioned in the local paper (the Comet) next week, but the archives aren't online.
@Marnanel: I think checking a local paper is a good idea. Often, libraries will have microfilm archives of old newspapers if it is not online. If you are not in the area anymore, someone at WP:RX might have access. RudolfRed (talk) 05:06, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In London, probably until the Thames Barrier was completed in 1982, the sirens were to be used to warn of flooding; in order to ensure they were ready, every so often they sounded the 'All Clear' (single rise of pitch followed by a long fall). We were about 100 yards from the nearest one and, yes, terrifying for a kid. Was Letchworth in danger of flooding? And did you hear the 'All Clear', or the 'Warning' (repeated rise and fall of pitch)? -- Verbarson talkedits20:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At the end of the Cold War in 1992, the siren network was decommissioned, and very few remain... Around 1,200 sirens remain, mostly used to warn the public of severe flooding... Most of them usually tested annually between August and September...
Besides Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of the United States and Zarah Sultana and Apsana Begum of UK, are there any other politicians who are left-wing and women of colour who have been ridiculed by their colleagues in their own party and by the right for being not with the status quo and mainstream because of their stances and views? Donmust90 (talk) 17:23, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Probably all of them? The current US VP, Kamala Harris, gets it pretty bad from both parties. The US Democrats are mostly a centrist party with a few left leaners (the ones you mentioned, plus Barbara Lee and a few others) and some right leaners. I guess Harris is near the center though (not sure). Tulsi Gabbard was further left (except for some particular issues) and she got it pretty bad when she was in office. Outside the US, I don't know. You should add Cori Bush to your "squad" list, and I think there are a couple more whose names don't come to mind. 2601:644:8501:AAF0:0:0:0:2034 (talk) 19:45, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article 16 of the Hague Convention says: "A belligerent war-ship may not leave a neutral port or roadstead until twenty-four hours after the departure of a merchant ship flying the flag of its adversary."[7]
I don't see any clause in this Article that limits how long a "trap" like this can last. Can this "trap" be used to force a warship to stay in a neutral port for the duration of an entire war? Liberté2 (talk) 02:52, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Only if you have enough merchant ships to have one depart each and every day. Although I suppose you could make do with two. Have ship A depart on day 1, ship B depart on day 2 and have A return to port the same day, and keep on alternating. However, the authorities might get a bit tired of these shenanigans. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:34, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably the merchant ships had a planned itinerary with bills of lading and Montivideo was on their route. I don't think that diverting merchant ships or running them empty would qualify, which running them in and out of port on alternate days would suggest. 2A00:23C7:2B14:A201:D4C3:1F14:2CBE:C1E0 (talk) 13:54, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You could send them from Montevideo (Uruguay) to Buenos Aires (Argentina) and back. It's about a 110 mile run; even at a leisurely 5 knots that's only 22 hours, less if you can get a bit of a shift on or take a tidal assist. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 15:06, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bolivar Roads, Hampton Roads, Lahaina Roads and Puget Sound are the only American ones in the list at roadstead. I've never heard anything in Boston, Philly or Baltimore called a roads(tead) either but I'm not a boater. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's the law in many places that if a tree that's planted on your property has branches that extend beyond your fenceline and into your neighbour's property, then what they do about those parts of the branches beyond the fenceline is entirely a matter for them. Effectively, those parts of the hanging branches are your neighbour's property, not yours.
Is it correct to also say that if I wish to prune my tree, I am prohibited from pruning any parts that hang over the neighbour's fence unless I have their permission? What if I wish to chop my tree down, but the neighbour has become attached to the overhanging branches and doesn't want them removed? (I'm reminded of Shylock's dilemma, where he was permitted to take his pound of flesh but not to spill a single drop of blood.) -- Jack of Oz[pleasantries]06:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have had reason to investigate this in a UK context. In UK law, it is indeed the case that one can cut off a branch (or trim a hedge, etc.) extending into one's property at any point up to the boundary line. One should however dispose of it as one would with one's own garden waste, not throw it back into the property from which the tree (etc.) is growing (as has happened to me). Additionally, if the branch is bearing fruit, one should offer to return the fruit to the tree's owner.
It is not the case that if one's own tree branch extends into a neighbor's property, one cannot prune or remove the tree without their permission. However, one would need their permission to enter their property in order to do so, if that were necessary.
This from the Victorian government suggests that unlike in the UK (as per the IP), branches and leaves should be returned to the tree owner as they remain their property, unless there's an agreement otherwise. [8]
I assume most neigbour's would be happy for you to keep the branches and leaves, and in any case, I quite doubt just throwing them over is what you should do especially since there may be risks from doing so. Instead if they did ask for them back, I assume your take them over via some agreed access route. (I mean if they tell you to just throw them over then that would be fine.)
The reason you're allowed to prune branches up to the property line is because of right of abatement[9] not because they became your property.
While it doesn't definitely say you don't need permission to prune trees on your property which overhang onto a neighbours, it strongly suggests it since it talks about overhanging branches from the non owner's PoV, but then just says owners can do generally whatever you want with trees on their property unless they are protected by an environmental overlay.
There are stuff I found which suggests it might be the same in NSW but I'm reluctant to give these in a question like as they are commercial sites and this answer is IMO already on the borderline of legal advice.
For clarity, while I didn't see this specifically answered, I assume if neither of you want the branches then the person who cut the tree is the one responsible for dealing with them, just like they're responsible for the costs of cutting it. It sounds like this is actually the same in the UK [10]Nil Einne (talk) 00:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) One more point, I know in NZ, and it sounds like it's also the case in at least some parts of Victoria [11][12], someone including a neighbour could nominate a tree to be protected. And if a tree is protected, it would limit what the property owner can do. However by itself the fact branches overhang someone else's property is unlikely to make it more likely it will be protected. It may even make it less likely, although not sure on this. I'm not sure if being an immediate neigbour as opposed to someone else who at least lives in the neighbourhood will even be relevant. (Possibly even living nearby won't be significant.) Nil Einne (talk) 03:46, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"If you are cold, tea will warm you; if you are too heated, it will cool you; If you are depressed, it will cheer you; If you are excited, it will calm you." is a quotation widely attributed to William Gladstone. I haven't been able to pin down a definitive source though. Can anyone here help? Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 00:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Very often someone wins a lawsuit and receives a huge damage award from the jury (whether that is good or bad depends on your sympathies, so we'll ignore that question). There is invariably an appeal and even when the verdict itself is upheld, the damage award seems to always get chopped to a fraction of what the jury decided. Again that can seem unfortunate depending on the case, but it's a frequent occurence either way.
E. Jean Carroll was just awarded $83.3 million in a verdict against some orange haired guy, and she currently all over the TV talking about what she is going to do with the money. Is this particular verdict somehow likely to escape the appellate level shrinkage? It seems a bit premature. Not seeking speculation but wondering if there is some concrete legal aspect peculiar to the case, that somehow protects the award. Thanks. 2601:644:8501:AAF0:0:0:0:2034 (talk) 06:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC) Added: hmm, TV chyron now says Carroll award was decided by the judge rather than by a jury. Maybe that makes a difference. 2601:644:8501:AAF0:0:0:0:2034 (talk) 06:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In Gibson's Bakery v. Oberlin College, the damages amount was immediately reduced by the trial judge due to provisions of Ohio law, but the remaining amount was not reduced at the appellate level, and Oberlin ended up paying that amount, plus interest, three years later. AnonMoos (talk) 09:15, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was definitely the jury that ordered the defendant to pay this specific amount in damages, so I guess the chyron was about the presiding judge deciding not to use their power to reduce the amount for being unreasonable. Perhaps Ms. Carroll, not certain if she will actually see this amount (whether being reduced on appeal or by insolvency of the defendant), is using the opportunity to begin the difficult task of reputation repair. We are not allowed to CRYSTALBALL, but straightforward extrapolation of the defence strategy and the defendants behaviour leads one to think that appellate reduction is not to be expected. --Lambiam10:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Given the fact that this award was for the orange guy's continued defamation of Ms. Carroll after having previously been found liable and fined for virtually identical statements, I would say that there is little reason to expect any judge to reduce the award. This entire case was based on the fact that a lower fine didn't make him stop. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Will Orange Man appeal? We don’t know, and should not speculate (per WP:CRYSTAL). Will the amount be reduced if appealed? Again, we do not know and should not speculate. We can report on what has happened, but not on what might (might not) happen. Blueboar (talk) 18:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From what I've read, he is going to have a hard time finding grounds to appeal, though, because his lawyer raised almost no objections during the trial. - Jmabel | Talk04:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Various commentators I've heard have suggested that punitive part of the award at only 3.5x compensatory might stand e.g. [13][14]. LegalEagle also seem to suggest a similar thing although I won't link to it for BLP reasons (not Trump but his lawyer). Note that a lot of these reduced damages cases you're thinking of likely involve punitive damages a lot higher compared to the compensatory. I haven't seen so much comment on appealing the fairness of the compensatory damages. I'm not sure why but it might be because this is more difficult to challenge in cases like this where there's no clear way to decide what's fair. As per the point above, I'm not sure how well his lawyer did at challenging what the opposing lawyer was proposing for the compensatory damages. I'd imagine as with the other issues, if she didn't properly challenge aspects of it during the trial, she might have killed any chances of challenging them on appeal. Edit: I added another source which does suggest appealing the punitive damages is the most like aspect of an appeal that could bear fruit. Nil Einne (talk) 15:55, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It’s far more fun to speculate about “what will I do with $83.3 million dollars,” than it is to speculate about “what will I do with whatever-the-last-appeal says I’m supposed to get except-Orangeman-never-pays-his-bills.” DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 06:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
February 1
Names for Arab-American women similar to Tiger Mom and Mama Grizzly
Is there a term for Arab-American women in the US in similar how Asian women are called Tiger Moms and how White women are called Soccer moms, Hockey Moms and Mama Grizzlies? Donmust90 (talk) 00:02, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You do know that "soccer mom"/"hockey mom" and "tiger mom" have very different connotations? The first set implies a rich round of middle class extracurricular activities for the children, while the last implies an intense focus on their educational achievement. "Mama grizzly" is a political term strongly associated with Sarah Palin. Anyway, the answer to your question is that no such term is known to the general U.S. public. AnonMoos (talk) 00:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Identifying an artist
Hi all, I randomly came across File:Russo-French skirmish during Crimean War.PNG on Commons, and wondered who the artist was. The image has been cropped slightly to hide the artist's signature, the original is here at the NY Public Libraries digital collection. Even so, the name is still partially hidden, looks something vaguely like J. Le Blount. Can anyone identify the artist? MinorProphet (talk)
I'm not very familiar with the American literature about the Civil War, so I can't find the right place to look for the (seemingly) simple fact of how many naval flag officers and commodores the Confedarcy had. I know that Buchanan was the only (full) Admiral and Semmes the only Rear Admiral. I also know that Flag Officer was considered a regular rank of flag rank (equal to an Admiral first, later equal to a Rear Admiral) for some time and then fell out of use (when?), while Commodore was more or less only an unoffical courtesy title. But I can't find a full list of all Confederate flag officers and commodores. This register of officers names only five Flag Officers and not a single Commodore. This can't be all, can it? 2A02:8109:BD1D:4400:49FE:B236:F09C:E034 (talk) 19:24, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A Library of Virginia Confederate Navy search for "commodore" claims that French Forrest ("Commodore, Virginia Navy in 1861.") and Matthew Fontaine Maury ("Commodore, C.S. Navy") also held that rank. Flag officers in the same database include: Samuel Barron ("Flag Officer commanding naval forces in Europe"), William W. Hunter (" Captain Flag Officer in Georgia waters in 1863-1865"), and a J. R. Tucker (not this guy) ("Flag Officer commanding a Float [sic], C.S. Navy").
I'm not sure the book is really that great, since while it raised some interesting possibilities (connections with Egyptian hieroglyphics etc), it didn't persuade many scholars of additional readings of specific Sinaitic words beyond the already-established לבעלת, so it left the decipherment question pretty much where it was. You could ask at the article talk page Talk:Proto-Sinaitic script, which has been active at times... AnonMoos (talk) 05:07, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can it be a goose? Nomen (ancient Egypt) § Heraldic appearance: The title Sa-Rê, literally meaning "Son of Ra", was written with the sign of a sun-disc and that of a goose placed below.
Good one! That scarab's design makes this photo look familiar. I'm trying to find the photo of that scarab. If it's there, it's not on the next page. Temerarius (talk) 19:30, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
^Albright, William Foxwell (1969). The Proto-Sinaitic Inscriptions and Their Decipherment. ISBN0-608-18593-0.
February 2
State funerals of British Monarchs
In the state funerals of British monarchs, the regalia placed on, and later removed from, the coffin are the Sceptre with cross, Sovereign's Orb and the Imperial State Crown. The first two make sense as they are used in the rite of crowning during the coronation ceremony. The Imperial State Crown seems a more unusual choice, given that it has no role in the ceremony other than the outward procession and is not the main crown of the Crown Jewels. St Edward's Crown is because that is the one used at the moment of coronation. So why is the Imperial State Crown used for royal funerals rather than the more senior St. Edward's Crown. --Andrew09:18, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A possible reason for the absence of St Edward's Crown may be that it symbolizes the royal authority, which passes on immediately to the successor when the reigning monarch dies. --Lambiam10:19, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Potentially I suppose as the crown never dies, it just transfers so perhaps it is more appropriate for the Imperial State Crown to be used. --Andrew11:55, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See also Iron Crown, used for the coronation of Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor in 1431. Cf. the Holy Crown of Hungary, the physical posession of which in ancient times entitled its owner to be king, eg Matthias Corvinus. According to Péter Révay, "When Hungary needed a new monarch it did not seek a crown to inaugurate a king, but a king worthy of the Crown[...]The crown itself is a legal person identical to the state of Hungary. It is superior to the ruling monarch, who rules 'in the name of the crown'". MinorProphet (talk) 18:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Never watched it, despite a gazillion shots/memes. I'll get back to you. In the meantime, I feel there's not enough poetry on the refdesks. Thus, via The Contention of Ajax and Ulysses:
The Glories of Our Blood and State
By James Shirley, c.1654
The glories of our blood and state
Are shadows, not substantial things;
There is no armour against Fate;
Death lays his icy hand on kings:
Sceptre and Crown
Must tumble down,
And in the dust be equal made
With the poor crooked scythe and spade.
Some men with swords may reap the field,
And plant fresh laurels where they kill:
But their strong nerves at last must yield;
They tame but one another still:
Early or late
They stoop to fate,
And must give up their murmuring breath
When they, pale captives, creep to death.
The garlands wither on your brow;
Then boast no more your mighty deeds!
Upon Death's purple altar now
See where the victor-victim bleeds.
Your heads must come
To the cold tomb:
Only the actions of the just
Smell sweet and blossom in their dust.
Now, generally, a person who represents oneself is said "to have a fool for a client". but anyways...
My question is, does the constitution allow for the law in certain circumstances to ban self-representation? I.e require a party to be represented by a lawyer?
"Why do some (non-U.S) jurisdictions do exactly this?", I'm sure some of you may be asking.
Well, in trials for sexual offenses, it can be very traumatizing for the victim to be cross-examined by her rapist. Ergo, where I live (Australia) some states have introduced laws that state that in trials for rape and sexual assault, the defendant (i.e. the alleged perpetrator) is banned from personally cross-examining his alleged victim. He must have a lawyer do the job for him.
The same applies for "intervention orders/ domestic violence injunction orders/ stalking intervention injunction orders" The alleged stalker or domestic abuser is banned from personally cross-examining his victim. He is eligible for a public defender to represent him, however. Ditto in the family court , in cases where one party alleges domestic violence; the other party must have a lawyer cross examine the accuser.
(Note that these steps were unfortunately sometimes unbudgeted-for, and caused cost blowouts in the public defender offices who were swamped with demand to represent parties who previously would have been expected to represent themselves. Particularly in the "intervention orders" division. Since such orders are themselves "civil, not criminal" (though breaching them is a crime), people were previously not generally allocated a public defender for them).
OK - so that's how things work here in Australia. My question is regarding the good ol' U S of A.
Have any American courts ruled on the constitutionality of these sorts of laws? Does the "right to counsel" also infer a right to reject counsel, and go pro-se instead?
Would things differ in civil versus criminal proceedings?
@John M Baker:@Newyorkbrad: as our resident lawyers, would you be able to shed any light on this? Others who can dig up anything, feel free to contribute.
Massachusetts became the sixth state admitted into the United States?
Wikipedia's front page says that on this date in 1788, Massachusetts ratified the Constitution of the United States and became the sixth state admitted into the Union. This doesn't seem right to me. The US Constitution didn't go into affect until 2/3rds of the then 13 states ratified the Constitution. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that while Massachusetts was the 6th state to ratify the constitution, the first 9 all entered the US at the same time? In fact, even that seems wrong since before the Constitution, the US was governed by the Articles of Confederation which Massachusetts ratified in 1778. I think most people would recognize that Massachusetts became part of the US on July 4th, 1776 when the United States declared independence from Great Britain. I'm not sure if the concept of "admission" to the Union even makes sense for the first 13 colonies since the United States didn't exist for them to be admitted into it. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 11:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
Resolved
