text:
Handbook of Genetic Counseling/Velopharyngeal Inadequacy (VPI)

Velopharyngeal Inadequacy (VPI)

Contracting

 * What have you been told about VPI?
 * What concerns would you like to address today?
 * Discuss the agenda for the appointment
 * Dr. Doktour - geneticist
 * Dr. Doktour2 - ENT
 * Dr. Doktour3 - speech pathologist

Intake and family history

 * Important because we need to determine if VPI is isolated or is part of a genetic syndrome
 * To ensure best medical treatment of any possible effects of a genetic condition
 * To determine inheritance pattern and recurrence risks
 * Ask about exposures/medications/illnesses during pregnancy
 * Elicit medical history
 * Ask about family history of clefts, birth defects, heart problems, learning problems, early deaths, miscarriages

Genetic etiology and natural history

 * Caused by inadequacy of velopharyngeal valve to close during speech
 * The velum (soft part of palate in back of mouth) separates the oral cavity from the nasal cavity
 * Normally the valve is open to allow air to flow, but it should close during speech
 * Muscles in pharynx (throat) also contract to move its walls inward
 * VPI occurs if velum is not long enough to cover the hole, the pharynx is too wide, or the muscles in the velum or pharynx are not strong enough to close
 * Terminology
 * Velopharyngeal Inadequacy - general term for velopharyngeal dysfunction
 * Velopharyngeal Insufficiency - anatomical or structural defect that prevents adequate velopharygeal closure
 * Velopharyngeal Incompetence - neuromotor or physiological disorder resulting in poor movement of structures
 * Velopharyngeal mislearning - inadequate closure secondary to faulty learning of appropriate articulation patterns
 * Occurs often in individuals with history of cleft palate or with a submucous cleft
 * May be associated with genetic syndrome or underlying congenital anomaly
 * Velocardiofacial syndrome (VCF)
 * About 20% of individuals with VPI are diagnosed with VCF in this clinic
 * Highly variable condition:
 * Conotruncal heart defects (50%)
 * Tortuosity and medial displacement of carotidarteries
 * Characteristic facies:
 * Microcephaly
 * Narrow palpebral fissures
 * Wide nasal root
 * Bulbous nasal tip
 * Vertical maxillary excess
 * Thin upper lip
 * Long face
 * Micrognathia
 * Minor auricular anomalies
 * Short stature (below 10th percentile)
 * Kidney or urinary tract anomalies
 * DiGeorge sequence
 * Hypotonia
 * Learning problems or mental retardation
 * Behavioral problems
 * FISH studies find deletion of 22q11 for 90% of patients
 * Stickler syndrome
 * Most common cause of cleft palate
 * Autosomal dominant with various expressivity
 * Classical presentation
 * Pierre Robin sequence
 * Early onset osteoarthiritis
 * Severe myopia and retinal detachments
 * Sensorineural and conductive hearing loss
 * Characteristic facies
 * Micrognathia in infancy
 * Flat facial profile
 * Epicanthal folds
 * Midface hypoplasia
 * Flat nasal bridge
 * Development usually normal
 * Diagnosis usually made clinically because genetically heterogeneous
 * May be due to teratogenic exposure during pregnancy
 * Critical period for palatal development from weeks 8-11
 * Includes viruses, drugs, infections, and radiation

Clinical features

 * Hypernasality
 * Nasal air emission
 * Weak or omitted consonants
 * Short utterance length
 * Altered rate and speech segment durations
 * Compensatory and obligatory articulation productions
 * Nasalization of oral consonants
 * Glottal stop
 * Nasal sniff
 * Breathiness

Assessment

 * Done by multidisciplinary team
 * Perceptual speech assessment
 * Listen to speech and observe facial movements during articulation
 * Detect abnormal air flow through nose
 * Nasometry
 * Airflow measures
 * Endoscopy
 * Allows visualization of valving mechanism during speech
 * Pass flexible tube through nasal passages
 * Multiview videofluoroscopy
 * For children too young for endoscopy
 * May require barium for contrast

Management

 * Nonsurgical
 * Mild VPI cases
 * Speech therapy to improve articulation and strengthen closure patterns
 * Prosthetic devices
 * For patients who cannot undergo surgery or are not helped by repeated surgeries
 * Obturator (dental prosthesis) that extendsinto velopharyngeal space and closes valve when pharyngeal walls move inward
 * Palatal lift lifts soft palate into position so that velum is close to pharyngeal walls if palatal motion is not sufficient
 * Surgical
 * Recommended when possible
 * Usually performed around 4-5 years old
 * To prevent abnormal leakage of air through faulty valve
 * Pharyngeal flap
 * Create flap of mucous membrane and muscle from back of throat to soft palate
 * Small openings remain on either side to allow air to move through nose
 * Must be careful of abnormally placed carotid arteries in kids with VCF
 * Sphincter pharyngoplasty
 * Repositioning muscles that run vertical from soft plate to sides of pharynx
 * Not as common
 * Children require close monitoring after surgery
 * Healing takes about 1 year
 * Still may require speech therapy

Psychosocial Issues

 * Feelings about the diagnosis (anxiety, fear, guilt, depression, relief)
 * Support - family, friends
 * Disruption of school, family life for management

Resources

 * The Cleft Palate Foundation
 * Phone: 1-800-24-CLEFT
 * Web: http://www.cleft.com
 * Provides local support groups, brochures, and fact sheets
 * Velo-Cardio-Facial Syndrome Education Foundation
 * Phone: 1-315-464-6590
 * Web: www.vcfsef.org
 * Email: vcfsef@hscsyr.edu
 * Stickler Involved People
 * Phone: 1-316-775-2993
 * Web: www.sticklers.org
 * Email: sip@sticklers.org


text:
Carpentry/Framing/Walls

Framing walls begins with cutting the top and bottom plates to the desired lengths. If the wall is to be sheathed, the plates should be cut on 16" intervals, for example, the total length of the wall will be 26', the first plates should be cut at 16' and then the second set at 10', attached together at the ends. This ensures that once the stud spacing is laid out for the wall (every 16" on center in our example) a stud will land on the joint in our plates therefore supporting the joint. Having the plates together on edge and ensuring they are flush at one end, we hook our tape measure on to that end of our 16' set of plates and begin placing a mark every 16". This mark represents the center of our studs when we secure them.

Secure the studs to the one plate (perpendicularly) and then secure the other plate to the other end of the studs. A second top plate is often required. This second top plate will strengthen the joint in our original top plate and aid in securing our wall to other walls by overlapping as well as ensuring a proper load distribution from the trusses or joists above them to the studs of the wall being framed.

If sheathing or diagonally bracing the wall prior to raising, you must "square" the wall first. Secure the bottom of the wall(permanently or temporarily). Given that the length of the wall is the same at the top and bottom, and that the height is the same at both ends, a diagonal measurement is taken from one corner to the other, switch corners, shift the top of the wall side to side until both corner to corner measurements are equal. Secure top of wall temporarily to keep it square.

Begin sheathing from the same end you started laying out your studs so that the sheets break on the studs, or if the wall does not require sheathing, brace diagonally. Unsecure top of wall and raise wall until vertical.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Carpentry/Framing/Walls


text:
Handbook of Genetic Counseling/Vitamin C Deficiency

Vitamin C Deficiency

(Ascorbic Acid Deficiency, Scurvy)

General Information

 * Vitamin C is reducing agent that is easily oxidized or destroyed by heat
 * Deficiency can cause defects in collagen formation
 * Adrenal glands and lenses have high concentrations of Vitamin C

Etiology

 * Infants born with adequate stores of Vitamin C if mother's intake was good
 * Breast milk also provides adequate source of Vitamin C
 * Infants not breastfeeding or whose mothers are deficient require supplements
 * Majority of cases occur from 6-12 months
 * Febrile illnesses increase need for Vitamin C
 * Particularly infectious or diarrheal diseases
 * Iron deficiency, cold exposure, protein depletion, and smoking also increase need for intake of Vitamin C

Pathology

 * Collagen formed during deficiency is low in hydroxyproline
 * Leads to hemorrhage, defective tooth dentin, and loosening of teeth
 * Endochondral bone formation ceases
 * Bones may become brittle and fracture easily
 * Periosteum becomes loosened and hemorrhages in femur and tibia common
 * Degeneration in skeletal muscles, cardiac hypertrophy, bone marrow depression, adrenal atrophy if severe.

Clinical Manifestations

 * Begins with irritability, tachypnea, digestive disturbances, and loss of appetite
 * General tenderness, especially in legs
 * Pain causes pseudoparalysis with legs in "frog position"
 * Swelling and hemorrhage along legs
 * Face appears apprehensive, gums swollen
 * Depression of sternum
 * Petechiae in skin or mucous membranes
 * Hematuria, melena, orbital, or subdural hemorrhages
 * Anemia due to inability to utilize iron or impairment in folic acid metabolism
 * Swollen joints

Roentgenographic Manifestations

 * Usually basis of diagnosis of Vitamin C deficiency
 * Changes in long bones especially at knee
 * Begin as simple atrophy
 * Zone of well calcified cartilage appears as thick, irregular white line around bone
 * Difficult to diagnose at this stage
 * Subperiosteal hemorrhages at ends of bone may become more intense as deficiency becomes more severe

Diagnosis

 * Based mainly on clinical findings and history of poor intake of Vitamin C
 * Laboratory tests not very good index
 * Can get estimate from amount of urinary excretion of Vitamin C after test does of ascorbic acid
 * Children with deficiency secrete less ascorbic acid than those without
 * Check concentrations 3-5 hours after administration of test dose

Differential Diagnosis

 * Arthritis or acrodynia due to pain in limbs exacerbated by movement
 * Rheumatic fever - rare in children under 2 years of age
 * Suppurative arthritis and osteomyelitis
 * Syphilis due to pseudoparalysis - usually occurs at earlier age and has other symptoms
 * Polio - doesn't cause tenderness in limbs
 * Henoch-Schonlein purpura, thrombocytopenic purpura, leukemia, meningococcemia, nephritis also may be considered

Prognosis

 * Recovery rapid when treated correctly
 * Pain ceases within few days
 * May take months for subperiosteal hemorrhage to disappear
 * Body growth resumes quickly
 * Unrecognized/untreated cases may lead to death
 * From malnutrition, exhaustion, intercurrent disease
 * Uncommonly have permanent deformity

Treatment

 * Can be prevented by providing formula fed infants 25-50 mg ascorbic acid daily
 * Lactating mothers should have minimum intake of 80 mg per day
 * Children and adults need 50 mg per day
 * Therapeutic dose of ascorbic acid is 100-200 mg daily

Reference
"Vitamin C (Ascorbic Acid) Deficiency." Textbook of Pediatrics (1979):225-228.


text:
Cookbook:Toasted Baguette Slices with Pecan Butter, Brie and Apples

Ingredients

 * 24 ea. ¼-inch (0.5 cm) French bread baguette slices
 * 6 tbsp (about 90 ml) melted butter
 * 4 oz (140 g) chopped pecans
 * 1 tbsp (15 ml) peanut oil
 * Salt to taste
 * 4 oz (140 g) cream cheese, room temperature
 * 1 apple, cut into 24 slices
 * 8 oz (280 g) chilled brie cheese, trimmed and sliced into 24 pieces
 * 24 pecan halves

Procedure

 * 1) Place baguette slices on cookie sheet and brush with melted butter. Bake for 8 minutes or until golden brown in a 400°F (250°C) oven. Remove and allow to cool.
 * 2) Blend pecans and oil in processor or blender to smooth paste. Season with salt.
 * 3) Spread cream cheese on toasted bread, then top with apple slices and brie slices.
 * 4) Spread pecan butter over top of each one. Top with pecan half.
 * 5) Place back on cookie sheet, and bake until cheese melts slightly (about 1 minute).
 * 6) Serve and enjoy.


text:
Mac OS X Tiger/Meet the Applications/iChat

=Introduction= =Setting Up iChat= =The Buddy List=

=Instant Messaging=

Glossary
Because typing takes time, it's sometimes too hard to hold a real-time conversation using it. It's commonplace to not capitalize words, use sentence fragments, and abbreviate words to save time. Here's a handy cheat sheet for the most common words of IM lingo:

 * afaik - As far as I know
 * AIM - The AOL instant messaging network, or as a verb, "chat with" or "file transfer"
 * asap - As soon as possible
 * bbl - Be back later
 * bbml - Be back maybe later
 * bbs - Be back soon
 * bc - Because
 * brb - Be right back
 * btw - By the way
 * cu - See you
 * cul or cul8r - See you later
 * fyi - For your information
 * gtg or g2g - Got to go
 * idk - I don't know
 * iirc - If i recall correctly
 * imo - In my opinion
 * imho - In my humble opinion
 * jk - Just kidding
 * jp - Just playing
 * jc - Just chilling
 * k - Okay
 * l8r - Later
 * lol - Laughing out loud
 * np - No problem
 * plz - Please
 * rofl or rotfl - Rolling on the floor laughing
 * ruok - Are you okay
 * thx - Thanks
 * ttyl - Talk to you later
 * wtg - Way to go
 * yt - You There? (as in "Are You There?")

=Audio Chat= =Video Conferencing=


text:
Handbook of Genetic Counseling/Von Gierkes Disease (Glycogen Storage Disease Type I)

Von Gierkes Disease (Glycogen Storage Disease Type I)

Description

 * Pathway= The body needs sugar in the form of glucose to function. Glucose is what gives all of our cells the energy they need to function properly. In order to get it, it has to be broken down from larger molecules that store it (glycogen). It is primarily stored in the liver and muscles. This disorder has achnage in the genes that make the pieces that break down the larger molecules into sugar = the levels of sugar are too low and the large molecules start to build up.
 * Deficiency in the breakdown of glucose. G6Pase activity requires 2 components of the microsomal membrane: (1) a glucose-6-phosphate specific transport system that shuttles G6P from the cytoplasm to the lumen of the endoplasmic reticulum (a G6P translocase), and (2) an enzyme, glucose-6-phosphate phosphohydrolase, bound to the luminal surface of the membrane.
 * Three types
 * GSD Ia = the basic defect in glucose-6-phosphatase activity ion the liver, kidney and intestinal lining.
 * GSD Ib = defect is in the glucose-6-phosphate transfer gene so you can see activity of glucose-6-phosphatase when testing.
 * GSD Ic = defect is in the pyrophosphate transfer - RARE
 * GSD Id = defect in glucose transport - RARE

Characteristics

 * Type Ia (most commonly associated with vGD.
 * Short stature & growth delay
 * Abdomen protrusion
 * Build up of glycogen and fat in the liver
 * Enlarged liver and malignant/benign growths in the liver
 * Yellow plaques on skin (xanthomas)
 * Spider-like arteries, gout in the ear or kidney
 * Bleeding disorders
 * Hypoglycemia
 * Hypertension
 * Doll-like faces with large cheeks
 * Type Ib
 * All of the above
 * Small numbers of neutrophils in the blood (neutropenia)
 * Bacterial infections
 * Oral and intestinal sores.

Genetics

 * Type Ia maps to chromosome 17q21.
 * Type Ib maps to chromosome 11q23
 * All are autosomal recessive

Diagnosis

 * Based on variety of lab results
 * G6PD
 * Increase in lipids in blood (lipidemia)
 * High levels of uric acid in blood (hyperurcemia)
 * High levels of ketones in blood (ketonemia)
 * Metabolic acidosis (increase of acids or decrease in water fluid)

Treatment

 * Glucose drinks during the day
 * Infusion at night through a nasogastric tube
 * Cornstarch throughout the day for older children
 * Dietary restrictions on fructose and galactose = need to supplement with calcium and multivitamins.
 * Add Allopurinol to reduce uric acid levels which occurs because of the decrease in renal clearance and the increased production of uric acid as glycogen is not broken down.


text:
Handbook of Genetic Counseling/Von Hippel-Lindau Syndrome

Von Hippel-Lindau Syndrome

Overview of Cancer

 * Cancer is caused by a mixture of genes and environment
 * All cancer is genetic, but not all cancer is hereditary
 * Most cancers are sporadic
 * Cells in our bodies are always growing and dividing
 * Genes control and regulate cell growth
 * Changes in these genes result in a cell that grows out of control
 * Uncontrolled cell growth is cancer
 * Changes in DNA occur due to damage to genetic material
 * DNA contains instructions for making proteins
 * Proteins determine how cells work and regulate our development
 * DNA must be copied each time a cell divides, and mistakes can occur in this process
 * Hereditary cancer occurs when a person inherits one non-working copy of a gene
 * One step closer to developing cancer than person with two working copies
 * Features of hereditary cancer:
 * Earlier age of onset
 * Multiple generations affected
 * Bilateral or multiple primary cancers
 * Siblings both affected with related cancers

Etiology of VHL

 * VHL gene located on chromosome 3p26-25
 * Tumor suppressor gene
 * Normal gene product has several functions:
 * Transcriptional regulation by interaction with elongin
 * Post-transcriptional repression of genes induced by hypoxia
 * Regulation of p27 (cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor)
 * Over 150 mutations have been identified
 * Incidence is 1/35,000 to 1/40,000
 * 5-20% of mutations are de novo
 * Penetrance is 80-90%
 * Autosomal dominant inheritance
 * There is genotype-phenotype correlation

Clinical Features

 * Hemangioblastoma
 * CNS hemangioblastoma
 * Characteristic lesion of VHL
 * 80% develop in brain and 20% in spinal cord
 * Clinical symptoms
 * Headache, vomiting, and gait disturbance or ataxia if in brain
 * Pain, sensory and motor loss, or asymptomatic if in spinal cord
 * Generally slow growing but may also be rapidly enlarging cysts in brain causing hydrocephalus and papilledema
 * Retinal
 * Found in about 70% of patients and are often initial manifestations
 * May be detected on ophthalmoscopy
 * Clinical symptoms
 * Asymptomatic in some individuals
 * Visual field defect
 * Loss of visual activity due to retinal detachment or hemorrhage
 * Number of hemangiomas doesn't increase with age but probability of vision loss does
 * Renal lesions
 * Multiple renal cysts are common
 * Renal cell carcinoma occurs in about 40% of patients
 * Usually clear cell type
 * Develop within cyst or in surrounding parenchyma
 * Leading cause of mortality
 * Pheochromocytoma
 * May cause sustained or episodic hypertension or be asymptomatic
 * Located on one or both adrenal glands usually but may be in other places
 * Rarely cause malignant degeneration
 * Pancreatic lesions
 * Most are simple cysts and are usually multiple
 * Rarely cause endocrine or exocrine insufficiency
 * Cysts in head of pancreas can cause biliary obstruction
 * Neuroendocrine tumors of pancreas can develop and become malignant
 * Endolymphatic sac tumors (10% of patients)
 * Cause deafness of varying degrees of severity
 * Vertigo or tinnitus may be presenting complaint
 * Large tumors can invade other cranial nerves
 * Epididymal tumors
 * Relatively common in males
 * May cause infertility if bilateral
 * Women may develop equivalent papillary cystadenoma of broad ligament - uncommon
 * Natural history
 * Wide variation in age of onset of symptoms
 * Organ system involvement and disease severity also vary greatly

Genotype - Phenotype Correlation

 * Type 1 - no pheo
 * Partial gene deletion
 * Small insertions or deletions (frameshifts)
 * Nonsense mutations
 * Splice site mutations
 * Type 2 - with pheo
 * Missense mutations
 * Type 2A
 * Without renal cell carcinoma and pancreatic cysts
 * Y98H, Y112H, V116F, L188V
 * Type 2B
 * With renal cell carcinoma and pancreatic cysts
 * R167Q and R167W
 * Type 2C
 * With pheos only
 * V155L and R238W

Diagnosis

 * Clinical diagnosis
 * Features needed for diagnosis
 * Isolated case with two or more characteristic lesions
 * Asymptomatic individual with positive family history with one or more of following
 * Retinal hemangioblastoma
 * Spinal or cerebellar hemangioblastoma
 * Pheochromocytoma
 * Multiple pancreatic cysts
 * Epididymal cystadenoma
 * Multiple renal cysts
 * Renal cell carcinoma before age 60
 * Tests used to make diagnosis
 * CT scans or MRI to look for CNS and visceral tumors
 * Ultrasound exam of epididymus, broad ligament, and possibly kidneys
 * Radioiodine labeled MIBG if extra-adrenal tumors are susected
 * Urinary catecholamine metabolite analysis
 * VMA, metanephrine, and total catecholamine
 * Suggest presence of pheos even if hypertension not present
 * Molecular genetic testing
 * Available clinically
 * For cases that meet strict clinical criteria, mutation detection nears 100%
 * Southern blotting
 * Detects complete or partial gene deletions
 * Responsible for about 28% of cases
 * DNA sequence analysis
 * Of all three exons to detect point mutations
 * Missense mutations not previously characterized must be interpreted with caution
 * Indicated in all individuals with known or suspected VHLdiagnosis
 * Prenatal testing
 * For pregnancies at 50% risk if mutation identified in affected parent
 * Typically adult-onset so requires careful genetic counseling

Treatment/Management

 * Surveillance
 * DNA testing in at-risk family members can reduce need for costly screening in those who test negative
 * Early recognition of manifestations may allow for improved outcome
 * Ophthalmological screening beginning at age 5
 * Annual blood pressure monitoring and measurement of urinary catecholamine metabolites beginning at age 5 in families with pheos
 * Annual abdominal ultrasound beginning at age 16
 * CT or MRI of suspicious lesions in kidney, adrenal gland, or pancreas
 * Possible baseline MRI of brain and spine in young adults
 * Management of tumors
 * CNS hemangioblastoma
 * Some advocate early surgical removal while others follow lesions with imaging
 * Most lesions eventually require intervention
 * Gamma knife surgery can be used for small tumors or those in inoperable sites
 * Surgical complications include paraplegia and operative mortality (10%)
 * Retinal hemangioblastoma
 * Laser and cryosurgery used with varying degrees of success depending on location, size, and number of lesions
 * Recurrent tumors have been noted
 * Renal cell carcinoma
 * Early surgery is best option
 * Renal transplantation in patients who require bilateral nephrectomy
 * Pheochromocytoma
 * Surgically removed
 * Preoperative treatment with alpha-adrenergic blockade for 7-10 days
 * Endolymphatic sac tumors
 * Slow growing
 * Possible deafness if removed
 * Epididymal or broad ligament papillary cyst adenomas usually don't require surgery

Resources

 * American Cancer Society
 * 1-800-227-2345
 * Web: www.cancer.org

 * VHL Family Alliance
 * 1-800-767-4845
 * Email: info@vhl.org
 * Web: www.vhl.org


text:
Internet Technologies/History of email

Email began as an experiment by the military to be able to send to and from the battlefield. Thus was born email or electronic-mail

The first email was sent in 1972 using two machines by an engineer named Ray Tomlinsin. Later he wrote a mail program for Tenex, the BBN-grown operating system that, by now, was running on most of the ARPANET's PDP-10 machines. (Heliomedia) The mail program was written in two parts (1)to send messages, you would use a program called SNDMSG; (2)to receive mail, you would use the other part called READMAIL.(Heliomedia)

In 1972, the commands MAIL and MLFL were added to the FTP program and provided standard network transport capabilities for email transmission. FTP sent a separate copy of each email to each recipient, and provided the standard ARPANET email functionality until the early 1980's when the more efficient SMTP protocol was developed. Among other improvements, SMTP enabled sending a single message to a domain with more than one addressee, after which the local server would locally copy the message to each recipient. (Livinginternet)

Over the years the email has evolved with many different programs put with it and many people working to improve the email systems.

In 1993, the large network service providers America Online and Delphi started to connect their proprietary email systems to the Internet, beginning the large scale adoption of Internet email as a global standard. (Livinginternet)

The first important email standard was called SMTP, or simple message transfer protocol. SMTP was very simple and is still in use - however, as we will hear later in this series, SMTP was a fairly naïve protocol, and made no attempt to find out whether the person claiming to send a message was the person they purported to be. Forgery was (and still is) very easy in email addresses. These basic flaws in the protocol were later to be exploited by viruses and worms, and by security frauds and spammers forging identities. Some of these problems are still being addressed in 2004.

(Category: Net History)

Ian, Peter; http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/email.html

E-mail predates the Internet; existing e-mail systems were a crucial tool in creating the Internet. 1965 as a way for multiple users of a time-sharing mainframe computer to communicate. Although the exact history is murky, among the first systems to have such a facility were SDC's Q32 and MIT's CTSS. E-mail was quickly extended to become network e-mail, allowing users to pass messages between different computers. The early history of network e-mail is also murky; the AUTODIN system may have been the first allowing electronic text messages to be transferred between users on different computers in 1966, but it is possible the SAGE system had something similar some time before. The ARPANET computer network made a large contribution to the evolution of e-mail. There is one report [1] which indicates experimental inter-system e-mail transfers on it shortly after its creation, in 1969. Ray Tomlinson initiated the use of the @ sign to separate the names of the user and their machine in 1971 [2]. The common report that he "invented" e-mail is an exaggeration, although his early e-mail programs SNDMSG and READMAIL were very important. The first message sent by Ray Tomlinson is not preserved; it was "a message announcing the availability of network email"[3]. The ARPANET significantly increased the popularity of e-mail, and it became the killer app of the ARPANET.

((Origins of E-mail)

http://www.lookforemails.com/EmailFacts.aspx

BBN was the first company to send an e-mail. BBN stands for Bolt Beranek and Newman. BBN was hired by the US Defense Department and created what is known as the ARPANET. The ARPANET helped to evolved into what is known today as the internet. The first e-mail was sent three years later in 1971 by Ray Tomlinson. Ray Tomlinson eventually was the first to use the @ symbol in his emails to show which message was sent at which computer to show that it wasnt a local host.

http://www.mailmsg.com/history.htm

One of the first new developments when personal computers came on the scene was "offline readers". Offline readers allowed email users to store their email on their own personal computers, and then read it and prepare replies without actually being connected to the network - sort of like Microsoft Outlook can do today. (Net History)

This was particularly useful in parts of the world where telephone costs to the nearest email system were expensive. (often this involved international calls in the early days) With connection charges of many dollars a minute, it mattered to be able to prepare a reply without being connected to a telephone, and then get on the network to send it. It was also useful because the "offline" mode allowed for more friendly interfaces. Being connected direct to the host email system in this era of very few standards often resulted in delete keys and backspace keys not working, no capacity for text to "wrap around" on the screen of the users computer, and other such annoyances. Offline readers helped a lot. (Net History)

The first important email standard was called SMTP, or simple message transfer protocol. SMTP was very simple and is still in use - however, as we will hear later in this series, SMTP was a fairly naïve protocol, and made no attempt to find out whether the person claiming to send a message was the person they purported to be. Forgery was (and still is) very easy in email addresses. These basic flaws in the protocol were later to be exploited by viruses and worms, and by security frauds and spammers forging identities. Some of these problems are still being addressed in 2004. (Net History)

But as it developed email started to take on some pretty neat features. One of the first good commercial systems was Eudora, developed by Steve Dorner in 1988. Not long after Pegasus mail appeared. (Net History)

When Internet standards for email began to mature the POP (or Post Office Protocol) servers began to appear as a standard - before that each server was a little different. POP was an important standard to allow users to develop mail systems that would work with each other. (Net History)

These were the days of per-minute charges for email for individual dialup users. For most people on the Internet in those days email and email discussion groups were the main uses. These were many hundreds of these on a wide variety of topics, and as a body of newsgroups they became known as USENET. (Net History)

With the World Wide Web, email started to be made available with friendly web interfaces by providers such as Yahoo and Hotmail. Usually this was without charge. Now that email was affordable, everyone wanted at least one email address, and the medium was adopted by not just millions, but hundreds of millions of people. (Net History)

title: Internet Technologies/History of email


text:
Arimaa

Table of Contents

Arimaa

title: Arimaa


text:
Cookbook:FAQ

What is the Cookbook?
For a detailed description of the cookbook, see its introduction chapter.

How can I add a page?
There are multiple ways to contribute a page to the cookbook. One way to do so is by visiting the page creation tool, entering your desired page title in the provided form, and following the directions there. Be sure to add the "Cookbook:" namespace to the beginning of the title, and consult the policy page for an explanation of how pages are formatted.

How can I find recipes to adapt?
You can find recipes to add to the Cookbook in a couple ways. Historical cookbooks that have passed into the public domain are one good option—The Household Encyclopedia, The Cook's Decameron, Mrs. Beeton's Book of Household Management, and Modern Cookery are a few examples, and more are available at Wikicommons, Wikisource, and The Internet Archive. Other good sources are old family recipes or recipes you yourself have developed. Do not add recipes that are copyrighted or for which you do not own the rights.

How do I keep track of recent changes to the Cookbook?
First, select the recent changes module in the left-hand navigation. By default, the module displays changes made to all of the Wikibooks. You can then filter the listing by namespace, such as Cookbook or Cookbook talk, using the drop-down list and then clicking on the Go button.

Alternatively, you can use the watchlist to keep track of a particular entry. On the top of the page, when you are logged in, there is a tab that says "watch". When you click that button, the page will go onto your personal watch list. (In the mobile view, this is the outline of a 5-pointed star, ☆. When you click it, it becomes a solid green star, ★ .) Then, to see your watchlist, you can click the "My Watchlist" link in the upper right-hand corner (near your user name). Alternatively, when you edit a page, there is a check box labelled "Watch this page", which has the same effect. If you want to automatically watch every page you edit, you could click on the "preferences" link (right next to "my watchlist"), and under the "editing" button, click the checkbox labeled "Add pages and files I edit to my watchlist". Then, every time you edit any page in Wikibooks, it will add that page to your watchlist.

Why was my page deleted?
Pages can be deleted for a variety of reasons. One of the most common reasons is copyright violation, especially copying and pasting recipes from other sources incompatible with the Wikibooks copyright policy. Another common reason is redundancy with another existing page in the cookbook, in which case your material will be transferred to the existing page, if applicable, before deletion.

What if I have a question not answered here?
For general cookbook questions, feel free to ask on the table of contents talk page. For cookbook policy-related questions, you can ask on the policy talk page.

title: Cookbook:FAQ


text:
Arimaa/Relative Value of Pieces

A piece's value depends not just on its raw strength, but on its practical impact. The "weakest" pieces, rabbits, are the only ones which can score a goal; rabbits thus gain influence as goal paths open up. Other pieces gain influence when stronger enemy pieces are captured or marginalized.

Functional Strength
As the one piece that cannot be pushed or pulled, the elephant can roam the board freely, at least until it gets blockaded or needs to defend against a threat. An elephant mobility advantage can amount to a lot.

If the silver camel is captured, any remaining gold horse becomes stronger, as the silver elephant is now the only threat it faces. There is a similar effect on down the line; as threats are eliminated, weaker pieces can do more.

A strong goal threat is a valuable commodity; when one side has a path to goal, the opponent must stop that goal at any cost. One forced to prioritize goal defense could lose material simply because there isn't time to save it. Strong pieces might get tied up defending goal, or might not have time to move as other pieces defend goal.

"Even" Exchanges
In an even exchange, each side captures identical material within a few turns. This is not always a wash; such an exchange might actually undermine a strong position. Suppose Gold has lost a dog while Silver has lost her camel, with all other pieces remaining. Each side retains two horses, but Gold's are now functionally stronger, as there is no silver camel to threaten them. An "even" horse trade would leave Gold fewer pieces with which to threaten the two silver dogs and to support the gold camel.

If a friendly piece cannot be saved, getting compensation for it is the best that one can do. When one can save a piece or give it up for equal material, here are some considerations:

 * A blockader or framer should normally try to avoid even exchanges, which could leave his forces thin elsewhere.
 * A hostage-holder's advantage might also be undermined by an "even" trade; with fewer pieces, it might become more costly to have one's elephant in a home corner.
 * By contrast, even exchanges may strengthen a goal threat, by clearing space and reducing threats to advanced rabbits.
 * One who is well ahead in quantity of pieces will usually benefit from even trades, as a material loss tends to be harder on an already depleted army.
 * An even piece-for-piece trade will strengthen weaker pieces, but may indirectly weaken stronger pieces.
 * A player up by a dog will usually benefit from an exchange of camels or horses, as this will reduce the threats to dogs. Cat-for-cat or rabbit-for-rabbit trades, by contrast, might undermine a dog advantage, which makes one's own cats and rabbits stronger than the opponent's.
 * A player with the only remaining camel shouldn't readily trade a horse, as a horse can be quite powerful against a camel-less opponent.
 * A player with the only remaining camel should be wary of "even" trades in general, unless he is well up in quantity of pieces.
 * An even trade of strong pieces may favor one whose remaining forces are more balanced than the opponent's, as the opponent will then have a weak wing until he can move a strong piece across.

If none of the above clearly apply, one contemplating an exchange should consider simplicity versus complexity. Removing pieces from the board will leave fewer possible moves, perhaps making it harder to surprise or confuse the opponent. One who is behind can sometimes benefit by complicating the position, and might thus want to retain as many pieces as possible, if there is no clear upside to an exchange.

On 29g of, Gold defended c3 rather than exchanging camels, as Silver would have had a strong goal attack once the gold camel was gone.

Uneven Trades
When material is traded for non-identical material, the implications likewise depend on what has happened beforehand. Capturing a camel for a horse may not help a player who is well behind in quantity of pieces, as his dwindling army might be overloaded even by a camel-less opponent. Sometimes, one stronger piece is traded for two weaker pieces; such a two-for-one trade could favor either side, depending on the pieces and the position.

Since an elephant can't be pushed or pulled into a trap, an elephant is never traded for material. It is thus moot to consider an exchange value of an elephant relative to other pieces. On a full board, a cat is normally quite limited, so is worth only slightly more than a rabbit. The difference accelerates somewhat with each respective stronger piece. For a while, two-to-one balances might be figured thus:

 * A Dog is worth approximately two Rabbits.
 * A Horse is worth approximately a Dog and a Rabbit.
 * A Camel is worth approximately a Horse and a Cat.

Such balances are never hard-and-fast, as every position is different. A piece may greatly rise in value when a just-stronger enemy piece is captured or marginalized; after a horse exchange, for example, each dog may be worth more than two rabbits, even though rabbits themselves have been slightly strengthened also. If an exchange would open the door for a strong goal threat, the material involved might not matter.

When forces become uneven, subsequent gameplay must account for the asymmetry. If one side has the only remaining camel but the other has more total pieces, any exchange which deprives the camel of a friendly horse might render the camel useless, as the enemy elephant might then neutralize the camel at little cost elsewhere. The implications of a trade depend on what pieces it strengthens. If one side has lost a horse and the other has lost multiple weaker pieces, a camel exchange may allow the side with two horses to overload the side that has more pieces.

Material vs. Position
Taking a hostage might sometimes require one to forgo a capture or leave a friendly piece hanging. A hostage is usually worth less than a dog, so it would usually be better to save or capture a dog than to take a hostage. Even a hostage taken at no material cost will not always improve the hostage-holder's position; there is a cost to keeping one's elephant in a home corner.

The value of a frame likewise depends on the free pieces. A strong horse frame is sometimes nearly as good as an outright horse capture; if the opponent refuses to cut his losses and abandon the framed horse, the advantage could become greater still. In, Silver gave up a cat and a rabbit to secure a horse frame which the silver elephant then rotated out of; this paid off for Silver. Any position that gives one the only free elephant is highly valuable.

Strong pieces are often sacrificed in the endgame, when the focus is on goal threats. In, Silver gave up his camel at home but soon got a rabbit to goal. In, Gold gave up his camel in the northeast but soon forced a goal in the northwest. One must assess the strength of a goal threat before making such a sacrifice. If defending goal would require a material sacrifice, there is no choice, unless one can reach goal first.

Overall Position
In a given Arimaa position, it is not always clear which side has the ultimate advantage. For estimates regarding specific material balances, see these material evaluators, of which HarLog is considered the most accurate. Raw material is not the whole story, however. Furthermore, any advantage depends on the player knowing how to capitalize; often, the real advantage is with the one who best understands the position at hand.

title: Arimaa/Relative Value of Pieces


text:
Talk:Ido/Alphabet

Untitled
Diphthongs are not letters. La Kompleta Gramatiko Detaloza, the official grammar of Ido specifically says Ido has 26 letters. No digraphs (ch, sh, au, eu) are included as letters. Reference: http://es.geocities.com/krayono/kgd.pdf

title: Talk:Ido/Alphabet


text:
High School Physics/Applied Physics Experiments

Si Units
Force → $$newtons (N)$$

Pressure → $$pascals (Pa)$$

Acceleration → $$(meter per second) per second (\frac{m}{s^2})$$

Work → $$joule (J)$$

Force
Moving a block with your hand work done on the object

Acceleration
riding a bike down a hill, slipping and falling

Momentum

 * 1) inelastic collision (billiards type)
 * 2) elastic collision (both go together)

Energy

 * 1) Kinetic energy (motion)
 * 2) Potential energy (stored motion)
 * 3) magnetic energy(attractive motion)

Electricity
-Materials: batteries, wires,
 * 1) Current vs. Voltage: the pipe analogy
 * 2) Ohms law: metal (conductors) vs. rubber (insulators)
 * 3) Series circuits (part 1 of the circuits experiment)
 * 4) Parallel circuits (part 2 of the circuits experiment)
 * 5) Voltaic Cells - Making electrochemical batteries. (File: [[Image:Lab_-_Juicy_Fruit.pdf]])


text:
High School Physics/Mid semester cheat sheet / equation reference

Linear F = Ma A = Force/mass V = D/t Acceleration = Velocity/time Density = Mass/Volume

P = Mv M1(V1i) = M1(V1f) + M2(V2f) I = Ft

$$F = G(M1*M2)/r^2$$

Circular

distance = r (theta)

fd = fd

time = 2*pisqrt(l/g) Frequency = 1/period E = RC R(series) = R (parallel) = C(series) C(parallel)


text:
User:Mad Scientist~enwikibooks

I'm mostly a mad scientist.

I like to write and edit articles on anything scientific and math related.

You may be wondering; "what are you going to do tonight, Mad Scientist?"

The same thing I do every night, Pinky...try to take over the world!

title: User:Mad Scientist~enwikibooks


text:
Federal Rules of Evidence

The Federal Rules of Evidence are the ground rules for trials in the United States federal court system. This text presents the rules in order, along with examples and commentary on key points of the law of evidence.

Table of contents

 * 1) /Introduction/ - Scope - Mechanics
 * 2) /Judicial Notice/
 * 3) /Presumptions in Civil Actions/ - Burden of going forward - Burden of persuasion
 * 4) /Relevancy/ - Unfair prejudice - Character evidence - Habit - Policy exclusions - Sex offenses
 * 5) /Privileges/
 * 6) /Witnesses/ - Competency - Credibility - Impeachment
 * 7) /Opinions/ - Lay opinions - Expert opinions
 * 8) /Hearsay/ - Rule - Confrontation Clause - Exceptions
 * 9) /Authentication/
 * 10) /Documents/
 * 11) /Miscellaneous Rules/

Other law sources

 * Canadian Criminal Evidence

title: Federal Rules of Evidence


text:
Federal Rules of Evidence/Introduction

The Federal Rules of Evidence are a staple of American legal education. Almost all law students learn the rules in their first or second year of law school. An understanding of the rules is critical when arguing a case in the courtroom, and important for any lawyer seeking to protect their client when a suit is filed.

Article I of the Federal Rules sets forth some basic laws which govern the application of the other rules of evidence.

Rule 101. Scope

 * These rules govern proceedings in the courts of the United States and before United States bankruptcy judges and United States magistrate judges, to the extent and with the exceptions stated in rule 1101.

The purpose of this rule is to define when the Federal Rules of Evidence are authoritative. Most generally, the rules apply in federal courts at any level. However, the rules are also germane to proceedings in state courts because as of January 1, 2004, 41 states and Puerto Rico had adopted the Federal Rules of Evidence. Each state likely made several moderate and some substantial changes to the rules before they were officially codified by the state legislature.

There is no direct mention of rule 104, and there probably should be because while the rules generally govern proceedings in the district courts, they do not govern preliminary questions on the admissibility of evidence, except for rule 501. Rule 1101 specifically states when the rules are applicable or inapplicable. Military courts use the evidence rules of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Rule 102. Purpose and Construction

 * These rules shall be construed to secure fairness in administration, elimination of unjustifiable expense and delay, and promotion of growth and development of the law of evidence to the end that the truth may be ascertained and proceedings justly determined.

Rule 102 is rarely cited by lawyers, but it quietly grants judges a huge deal of authority over trials, inviting them to "eliminate unjustifiable expense and delay" and "grow" and "develop" the law of evidence through their administration of the rules.

Rule 103. Rulings on Evidence

 * (a) Effect of erroneous ruling. Error may not be predicated upon a ruling which admits or excludes evidence unless a substantial right of the party is affected, and

 * (1) Objection. In case the ruling is one admitting evidence, a timely objection or motion to strike appears of record, stating the specific ground of objection, if the specific ground was not apparent from the context; or
 * (2) Offer of proof. In case the ruling is one excluding evidence, the substance of the evidence was made known to the court by offer or was apparent from the context within which questions were asked.

 * Once the court makes a definitive ruling on the record admitting or excluding evidence, either at or before trial, a party need not renew an objection or offer of proof to preserve a claim of error for appeal.

If you've ever watched a courtroom drama on TV or in the cinema, you've probably seen lawyers make "objections" in the courtroom. Lawyers raise and argue issues of evidence through these objections. Objecting is important because if a lawyer fails to object to evidence, they cannot appeal their case on the grounds that the evidence was improperly admitted. Rule 103(a) forces lawyers to object to any evidence they think might unfairly decide their case, so as to "preserve error."

Objections come in many forms. Many objections are raised "in limine," before the trial even starts. This keeps attorneys from having to argue about sensitive evidence in front of the jury. Some objections are made when one side's attorney asks a witness a question that makes the other side uncomfortable. Objections can even be made after the evidence is heard by the jury: such an objection is called a "motion to strike," and while it won't keep the evidence away from the jury, it will preserve error.

 * (b) Record of offer and ruling. The court may add any other or further statement which shows the character of the evidence, the form in which it was offered, the objection made, and the ruling thereon. It may direct the making of an offer in question and answer form.

 * (c) Hearing of jury. In jury cases, proceedings shall be conducted, to the extent practicable, so as to prevent inadmissible evidence from being suggested to the jury by any means, such as making statements or offers of proof or asking questions in the hearing of the jury.

After an objection is made, an attorney or the judge will often request to speak "at sidebar," meaning out of the jury's earshot.

 * (d) Plain error. Nothing in this rule precludes taking notice of plain errors affecting substantial rights although they were not brought to the attention of the court.

While an objection is usually necessary to preserve error, appeals courts occasionally take notice of truly egregious errors by trial judges, even when there is no objection. However, such cases are rare: it's always important to object to any evidence that might become an issue of contention on appeal.

Rule 104. Preliminary Questions

 * (a) Questions of admissibility generally. Preliminary questions concerning the qualification of a person to be a witness, the existence of a privilege, or the admissibility of evidence shall be determined by the court, subject to the provisions of subdivision (b). In making its determination it is not bound by the rules of evidence except those with respect to privileges.

When a judge decides whether or not to admit evidence, they usually do so under Rule 104(a), with only two exceptions (noted below). A 104(a) determination is fairly straightforward: the attorneys present arguments for and against admissibility, often supported by extrinsic evidence, and the judge determines whether the contested evidence should be admitted. The arguments and evidence heard by the judge need not be admissible in front of the jury, with the caveat that privileged information (such as attorney-client communications) cannot be considered. (Privileges are discussed in further detail in this chapter.)

 * (b) Relevancy conditioned on fact. When the relevancy of evidence depends upon the fulfillment of a condition of fact, the court shall admit it upon, or subject to, the introduction of evidence sufficient to support a finding of the fulfillment of the condition.

Rule 104(b) is used in determining two types of evidentiary questions: authentication of evidence (Rule 901) and prior bad acts (Rule 404(b)). When these issues are being considered, the attorney must "tie up" the admissibility by presenting extrinsic evidence that proves admissibility. This can be done either before or after the evidence is presented, at the judge's discretion.

 * (c) Hearing of jury. Hearings on the admissibility of confessions shall in all cases be conducted out of the hearing of the jury. Hearings on other preliminary matters shall be so conducted when the interests of justice require, or when an accused is a witness and so requests.

Although judges have leeway to conduct evidentiary arguments in the presence of the jury, they will usually hear arguments at sidebar if either side requests it.

 * (d) Testimony by accused. The accused does not, by testifying upon a preliminary matter, become subject to cross-examination as to other issues in the case.

 * (e) Weight and credibility. This rule does not limit the right of a party to introduce before the jury evidence relevant to weight or credibility.

Rule 105. Limited Admissibility

 * When evidence which is admissible as to one party or for one purpose but not admissible as to another party or for another purpose is admitted, the court, upon request, shall restrict the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly.

Almost every trial contains at least one "limiting instruction," where the jury hears a damaging piece of evidence and the judge tells them they may only consider it for one purpose. Many lawyers argue against limiting instructions, claiming that "the bell cannot be unrung"—once the evidence has been heard, the jury will want to consider it for any end that seems relevant. However, appeals courts usually assume that the jury will follow the limiting instruction, except in rare cases where the evidence is powerfully incriminating in a patently unfair way.

As with objections, a lawyer must request a limiting instruction in order to preserve error on appeal. If they do not request the instruction, they cannot fault the trial judge for not imposing the instruction.

Rule 106. Remainder of or Related Writings or Recorded Statements
There are two basic types of evidence: testimony, evidence provided by the statements of witnesses in court, and exhibits, evidence provided in physical form.

Exhibits have to have a foundation that makes their admissibility valid. One key part of this foundation is authentication, or proving that the exhibit is what the proponent claims it is. For example, to show a "murder weapon" to the jury, the prosecutor must first establish that the weapon is the one used to commit the murder. Authentication rules are covered in depth in Article IX.

Writings and recorded statements follow additional rules on top of authentication, and Rule 106 is one such rule, requiring that writings and recorded statements be presented in context if the other side demands it.

 * When a writing or recorded statement or part thereof is introduced by a party, an adverse party may require the introduction at that time of any other part or any other writing or recorded statement which ought in fairness to be considered contemporaneously with it.

title: Federal Rules of Evidence/Introduction


text:
Federal Rules of Evidence/Judicial Notice

Article II of the Federal Rules of Evidence deals with judicial notice.

Rule 201. Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

 * (a) Scope of rule. This rule governs only judicial notice of adjudicative facts.

 * (b) Kinds of facts. A judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.

Judicial notice is a very simple way to introduce a fact as evidence, but it is not frequently invoked.

The best-known example of judicial notice comes from the 1858 trial of "Duff" Armstrong, who was charged with murder and defended by Abraham Lincoln, then a Chicago railroad lawyer. An eyewitness claimed that Armstrong was able to see the victim in the moonlight. Lincoln produced a copy of the Farmers' Almanac, and asked the judge to take judicial notice that the moon was too low in the sky to produce moonlight on the night in question. The judge agreed, and Armstrong was acquitted.

Judicial notice may be based on "sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned," such as Lincoln's almanac. Judicial notice can also be based on local general knowledge. A lawyer trying a case in New York may ask the judge to take judicial notice that the East River is located between Manhattan and Brooklyn, or that the Empire State Building is the tallest building in the city. In such a case, no extrinsic evidence would be necessary. However, if the New York lawyer wanted the judge to take judicial notice that the river is forty-five feet deep, or that Minneapolis is located west of St. Paul, the lawyer would probably need extrinsic evidence.

 * (c) When discretionary. A court may take judicial notice, whether requested or not.

Rule 201(c) is often implied when dealing with the validity of scientific tests. "Radar guns" are a common example. When they were first introduced to measure the speed of cars, many judges would require attorneys to establish the validity of their readings before the readings could be considered as substantive evidence. Today, most judges take judicial notice of the reliability of these readings whether counsel asks for it or not, since radar gun evidence is common in the courtroom. Opposing counsel can object, but judges need not obtain evidence to overrule the objection.

 * (d) When mandatory. A court shall take judicial notice if requested by a party and supplied with the necessary information.

Note that Rule 201(d) does not mean that all requests for judicial notice will be granted. Any judicial notice must be of a fact that falls under Rule 201(b). The judge may (and legally, should) refuse to take judicial notice of any fact that is not generally known or readily verifiable.

 * (e) Opportunity to be heard. A party is entitled upon timely request to an opportunity to be heard as to the propriety of taking judicial notice and the tenor of the matter noticed. In the absence of prior notification, the request may be made after judicial notice has been taken.

 * (f) Time of taking notice. Judicial notice may be taken at any stage of the proceeding.

 * (g) Instructing jury. In a civil action or proceeding, the court shall instruct the jury to accept as conclusive any fact judicially noticed. In a criminal case, the court shall instruct the jury that it may, but is not required to, accept as conclusive any fact judicially noticed.

Rule 201(g) differentiates criminal cases from civil cases. Its practical effect is on the jury instructions that come near the end of the trial. In the Armstrong case above, the judge's instruction would be:

 * "You may, but are not required to, accept as a fact that there was no moonlight on the night in question."

If Armstrong were a civil case (e.g., for wrongful death), the instruction would be:

 * "You must accept as conclusively true the fact that there was no moonlight on the night in question."


text:
Federal Rules of Evidence/Presumptions in Civil Actions

Article III of the Federal Rules of Evidence deals with presumptions and burdens of proof. It applies to civil actions—cases arising under non-criminal laws, such as contract, property and tort.

Rule 301. Presumptions in General Civil Actions and Proceedings

 * In all civil actions and proceedings not otherwise provided for by Act of Congress or by these rules, a presumption imposes on the party against whom it is directed the burden of going forward with evidence to rebut or meet the presumption, but does not shift to such party the burden of proof in the sense of the risk of nonpersuasion, which remains throughout the trial upon the party on whom it was originally cast.

The term "burden of proof" is often used in legal discourse, but for a technical analysis of the law, it is too vague. There are actually two forms of the burden of proof, commonly referred to as the burden of going forward and the burden of persuasion. Both of these burdens are addressed by Rule 301.

Burden of going forward
At any given time, one party is obligated to produce evidence regarding a claim or defense. This is the burden of going forward. When a presumption of fact is triggered, the other side has the burden to prove the non-existence of that fact. Yet the committee notes and house judiciary report for Rule 301 rejects a bursting bubble approach to the burden. That is, even if a party introduces adequate evidence contrary to the presumed fact, the presumption does not simply vanish—the presumption remains a part of the fact-finder's calculus.

For example, take a hypothetical civil case where one element of the claim is that it was raining on a given night. The plaintiff introduces evidence that the ground was wet the next morning. Imagine this creates a presumption that it rained the night before. The defendant must then rebut this presumption with other evidence: maybe eyewitnesses who say it wasn't raining, maybe evidence that a truck dumped water on the ground overnight. If a preponderance of the evidence disproves the presumption, the defendant has met his burden of persuasion. However, the presumption that it rained the night before remains may still be considered by the jury or finder of fact, and alone may be sufficient evidence of the rain.

Nevertheless, some Federal Courts still apply the bursting bubble approach. Under this approach, in the above example, the eye-witness testimony that it did not rain would entirely negate the presumption that it rained, and the presumption could not be considered by the finder of fact.

This approach is unique to civil cases. Presumptions are not found in criminal cases because of the due process guarantees of the Constitution. The prosecution must always prove each element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

Burden of persuasion
Beyond a reasonable doubt is one example of a burden of persuasion. That particular burden is the burden that applies when proving a criminal charge. In civil cases, the usual burden of persuasion is either preponderance of the evidence ("more likely than not") or clear and convincing evidence.

Unlike the burden of going forward, the burden of persuasion never shifts. Allowing it to shift would make no sense, because it only applies in the context of the factfinder's final decision—to the reasoning of the judge or jury in reaching their verdict. The plaintiff always has the burden to persuade the factfinder that their claim is valid; the civil defendant always has the burden to persuade the factfinder that their defense is valid.

Note that in criminal cases, the burden of persuasion rests with the prosecution at all times, even when the burden of going forward shifts to the defendant. For example, if the defendant raises an affirmative defense, the prosecution must persuade the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the defense is invalid.

Rule 302. Applicability of State Law in Civil Actions and Proceedings

 * In civil actions and proceedings, the effect of a presumption respecting a fact which is an element of a claim or defense as to which State law supplies the rule of decision is determined in accordance with State law.

Rule 302 applies to civil cases brought to federal court under diversity jurisdiction. Diversity jurisdiction is a complex issue of civil procedure that merits little discussion here, except to say that it involves federal courts interpreting the law of states. Whenever a federal court is considering an issue of state law, Rule 302 requires the court to apply that state's law on presumptions to the proceeding. This means that the burden of going forward in such cases may not necessarily follow Rule 301.


text:
Federal Rules of Evidence/Relevancy

Article IV of the Federal Rules of Evidence deals with relevancy—the first consideration in determining the admissibility of evidence.

Rule 401. Definition of "Relevant Evidence"

 * "Relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

Relevancy is the notion that every piece of evidence admitted in the courtroom must be "tied" to the case somehow. Any probative value will make evidence relevant. Note that relevancy is different from credibility. If evidence is merely unbelievable, the presumption is that it should be admissible, and the jury should decide whether or not to believe it.

Relevant evidence need not be probative of the core issues of the case, or of a disputed issue. Matters "of consequence" can include the background of parties and witnesses, or any other matter which weighs for or against the case of one of the parties.

Rule 402. Relevant Evidence Generally Admissible; Irrelevant Evidence Inadmissible

 * All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise provided by the Constitution of the United States, by Act of Congress, by these rules, or by other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible.

Rule 402 makes relevancy the first consideration when objecting to evidence. If evidence cannot be tied to a matter of consequence, it cannot be admitted at all, regardless of whatever rules might indicate its validity. If evidence is relevant, then the other rules of evidence come into play.

Rule 403. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time

 * Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.

Rule 403 provides a "balancing test" for excluding relevant evidence. The balancing test is strongly weighted toward admission; there must be a danger of unfair prejudice that substantially outweighs the probative value of the evidence. "Unfair prejudice" is not the same thing as "prejudice"—almost all relevant evidence is prejudicial to one side or the other. Proving unfair prejudice is often difficult; proving the balance is even moreso.

Ordinarily, a 403 objection is the last objection a lawyer makes when seeking to exclude evidence. Besides the burden of tipping the balance, another key problem is that a 403 objection concedes the relevance of the evidence.

Rule 404(a). Character evidence generally

 * ''Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion, except:

 * (1) Character of accused - Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or if evidence of  a trait of character of the alleged victim of the crime is offered by an accused and admitted under Rule 404 (a)(2),  evidence of the same  trait of character of the accused offered  by the prosecution;

 * (2) Character of alleged victim - Evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the alleged victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the alleged victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the alleged victim was the first aggressor;

 * (3) Character of witness - Evidence of the character of a witness, as provided in rules 607, 608, and 609.

Rule 404(b). Other crimes, wrongs, or acts

 * ''Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, provided that upon request by the accused, the prosecution in a criminal case shall provide reasonable notice in advance of trial, or during trial if the court excuses pretrial notice on good cause shown, of the general nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial.

Rule 405(a). Reputation or opinion

 * In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait of character of a person is admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination, inquiry is allowable into relevant specific instances of conduct.

Rule 405(b). Specific instances of conduct

 * ''In cases in which character or a trait of character of a person is an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense, proof may also be made of specific instances of that person's conduct.

Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice

 * Evidence of the habit of a person or of the routine practice of an organization, whether corroborated or not and regardless of the presence of eyewitnesses, is relevant to prove that the conduct of the person or organization on a particular occasion was in conformity with the habit or routine practice.

This is a cleverly worded rule, in the sense that it’s unique for a reason. It states that habit evidence is relevant for a particular reason, to prove conformity on a particular occasion. Normally, the rules specify a theory of relevance for which the evidence can or cannot be admitted; this rule does neither. By specifying that the evidence is relevant for a particular purpose, the rule does not preclude exclusion by any other rule. By not stating that it is admissible for that purpose, the rule does not preclude admission for other purposes by the principle of expressio unius est exclusio alterius. The rule's application and effect depends on how ‘habit’ is defined. Habit is difficult to distinguish from character. Usually, the trait must be proven to be a conditioned response and not otherwise inadmissible under rule 404(a). A habit is the person’s regular practice of meeting a particular kind of situation with a specific type of conduct, such as the habit of going down a certain stairway two stairs at a time; a habit action is semi-automatic. Still, it can be difficult to separate from character. Routine practice, as it relates to more commercial and mechanical actions, does not pose the same problem. Both are highly persuasive evidence. To be properly admitted, it must directly relate or be connected to the conduct which it purports to prove. At common law, habit evidence wasn’t admissible unless corroborated and there were eyewitnesses. Obviously, the federal rule has changed this.

Rule 407. Subsequent Remedial Measures

 * ''When, after an injury or harm allegedly caused by an event, measures are taken that, if taken previously, would have made the injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect in a product, a defect in a product's design, or a need for a warning or instruction. This rule does not require the exclusion of evidence of subsequent measures when offered for another purpose, such as proving ownership, control, or feasibility of precautionary measures, if controverted, or impeachment.

''

This rule is constructed along familiar lines: it excludes evidence (the undertaking of subsequent remedial measures) when it is presented under specified theories of relevance. However, the rule only bars subsequent remedial measures that would have prevented the harm that is the subject of the litigation. The rule incorporates language that clearly indicates the arena of products liability; the reasoning behind this is parallel to the foundational policy behind the rule: the judiciary does not want to dissuade manufacturers, or anyone else, from taking remedial measures that might prevent future harm. However, some courts allow it in products liability cases on the theory that the greater risk of liability, if admitted, would trigger the change, which is somewhat of a circular argument as it is designed to encourage improvements.

The purposes for which the evidence may be admitted are limited by the requirement that the offer is made to prove a controverted fact. It can’t be offered to prove ownership or feasibility of precautionary measures unless the opponent has denied ownership or that taking remedial measures was possible.

The rule does not bar evidence that measures have not been taken, but this might not be relevant unless the defense is lack of knowledge of the dangerous condition or product. Evidence of subsequent remedial measures made by someone other than the instant defendant, like a peer corporation, is not excluded by the rule. Firing an employee is a widely considered a subsequent remedial measure.

Rule 408. Compromise and Offers to Compromise
(a) Prohibited uses.--Evidence of the following is not admissible on behalf of any party, when offered to prove liability for, invalidity of, or amount of a claim that was disputed as to validity or amount, or to impeach through a prior inconsistent statement or contradiction:

(1) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish—or accepting or offering or promising to accept—a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise the claim; and

(2) conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations regarding the claim, except when offered in a criminal case and the negotiations related to a claim by a public office or agency in the exercise of regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority.

(b) Permitted uses.--This rule does not require exclusion if the evidence is offered for purposes not prohibited by subdivision (a). Examples of permissible purposes include proving a witness's bias or prejudice; negating a contention of undue delay; and proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution.

Rule 409. Payment of Medical and Similar Expenses

 * Evidence of furnishing or offering or promising to pay medical, hospital, or similar expenses occasioned by an injury is not admissible to prove liability for the injury.

Rule 410. Inadmissibility of Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements

 * Except as otherwise provided in this rule, evidence of the following is not, in any civil or criminal proceeding, admissible against the defendant who made the plea or was a participant in the plea discussions:

 * (1) a plea of guilty which was later withdrawn;
 * (2) a plea of nolo contendere;
 * (3) any statement made in the course of any proceedings under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure or comparable state procedure regarding either of the foregoing pleas; or
 * (4) any statement made in the course of plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority which do not result in a plea of guilty or which result in a plea of guilty later withdrawn.

 * However, such a statement is admissible (i) in any proceeding wherein another statement made in the course of the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced and the statement ought in fairness be considered contemporaneously with it, or (ii) in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement if the statement was made by the defendant under oath, on the record and in the presence of counsel.

Rule 411. Liability Insurance

 * Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible upon the issue whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully. This rule does not require the exclusion of evidence of insurance against liability when offered for another purpose, such as proof of agency, ownership, or control, or bias or prejudice of a witness.

Rule 412. Sex Offense Cases; Relevance of Victim's Past Behavior or Alleged Sexual Predisposition

 * (a) Evidence generally inadmissible. The following evidence is not admissible in any civil or criminal proceeding involving alleged sexual misconduct except as provided in subdivisions (b) and (c):
 * (1) Evidence offered to prove that any alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior.
 * (2) Evidence offered to prove any alleged victim's sexual predisposition.

 * (b) Exceptions.
 * (1) In a criminal case, the following evidence is admissible, if otherwise admissible under these rules:
 * (A) evidence of specific instances of sexual behavior by the alleged victim offered to prove that a person other than the accused was the source of semen, injury, or other physical evidence;
 * (B) evidence of specific instances of sexual behavior by the alleged victim with respect to the person accused of the sexual misconduct offered by the accused to prove consent or by the prosecution; and
 * (C) evidence the exclusion of which would violate the constitutional rights of the defendant.
 * (2) In a civil case, evidence offered to prove the sexual behavior or sexual predisposition of any alleged victim is admissible if it is otherwise admissible under these rules and its probative value substantially outweighs the danger of harm to any victim and of unfair prejudice to any party. Evidence of an alleged victim's reputation is admissible only if it has been placed in controversy by the alleged victim.

 * (c) Procedure to determine admissibility.
 * (1) A party intending to offer evidence under subdivision (b) must—
 * (A) file a written motion at least 14 days before trial specifically describing the evidence and stating the purpose for which it is offered unless the court, for good cause requires a different time for filing or permits filing during trial; and
 * (B) serve the motion on all parties and notify the alleged victim or, when appropriate, the alleged victim's guardian or representative.
 * (2) Before admitting evidence under this rule the court must conduct a hearing in camera and afford the victim and parties a right to attend and be heard. The motion, related papers, and the record of the hearing must be sealed and remain under seal unless the court orders otherwise.

Rule 413. Evidence of Similar Crimes in Sexual Assault Cases

 * (a) In a criminal case in which the defendant is accused of an offense of sexual assault, evidence of the defendant's commission of another offense or offenses of sexual assault is admissible, and may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant.

 * (b) In a case in which the Government intends to offer evidence under this rule, the attorney for the Government shall disclose the evidence to the defendant, including statements of witnesses or a summary of the substance of any testimony that is expected to be offered, at least fifteen days before the scheduled date of trial or at such later time as the court may allow for good cause.

 * (c) This rule shall not be construed to limit the admission or consideration of evidence under any other rule.

 * (d) For purposes of this rule and Rule 415, "offense of sexual assault" means a crime under Federal law or the law of a State (as defined in section 513 of title 18, United States Code) that involved--

 * (1) any conduct proscribed by chapter 109A of title 18, United States Code;
 * (2) contact, without consent, between any part of the defendant's body or an object and the genitals or anus of another person;
 * (3) contact, without consent, between the genitals or anus of the defendant and any part of another person's body;
 * (4) deriving sexual pleasure or gratification from the infliction of death, bodily injury, or physical pain on another person; or
 * (5) an attempt or conspiracy to engage in conduct described in paragraphs (1)-(4).

Rule 414. Evidence of Similar Crimes in Child Molestation Cases

 * (a) In a criminal case in which the defendant  is accused of an offense of child molestation, evidence of the defendant's commission of another offense or offenses of child molestation is admissible, and may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant.

 * (b) In a case in which the Government intends to offer evidence under this rule, the attorney for the Government shall disclose the evidence to the defendant, including statements of witnesses or a summary of the substance of any testimony that is expected to be offered, at least fifteen days before the scheduled date of trial or at such later time as the court may allow for good cause.

 * (c) This rule shall not be construed to limit the admission or consideration of evidence under any other rule.

 * (d) For purposes of this rule and Rule 415, "child" means a person below the age of fourteen, and "offense of child molestation" means a crime under Federal law or the law of a State (as defined in section 513 of title 18, United States Code) that involved--

 * (1) any conduct proscribed by chapter 109A of title 18, United States Code, that was committed in relation to a child;
 * (2) any conduct proscribed by chapter 110 of title 18, United States Code;
 * (3) contact between any part of the defendant's body or an object and the genitals or anus of a child;
 * (4) contact between the genitals or anus of the defendant and any part of the body of a child;
 * (5) deriving sexual pleasure or gratification from the infliction of death, bodily injury, or physical pain on a child; or
 * (6) an attempt or conspiracy to engage in conduct described in paragraphs (1)-(5).

Rule 415. Evidence of Similar Crimes in Civil Cases Concerning Sexual Assault and Child Molestation Cases

 * (a) In a civil case in which a claim for damages or other relief is predicated on a party's alleged commission of conduct constituting an offense of sexual assault or child molestation, evidence of that party's commission of another offense or offenses of sexual assault or child molestation is admissible and may be considered as provided in Rule 413 and Rule 414 of these rules.

 * (b) A party who intends to offer evidence under this Rule shall disclose the evidence to the party against whom it will be offered, including statements of witnesses or a summary of the substance of any testimony that is expected to be offered, at least fifteen days before the scheduled date of trial or at such later time as the court may allow for good cause.

 * (c) This rule shall not be construed to limit the admission or consideration of evidence under any other rule.

title: Federal Rules of Evidence/Relevancy


text:
Federal Rules of Evidence/Privileges

Article V of the Federal Rules of Evidence deals with privileges. It consists of one rule.

Rule 501. General Rule

 * Except as otherwise required by the Constitution of the United States or provided by Act of Congress or in rules prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority, the privilege of a witness, person, government, State, or political subdivision thereof shall be governed by the principles of the common law as they may be interpreted by the courts of the United States in the light of reason and experience. However, in civil actions and proceedings, with respect to an element of a claim or defense as to which State law supplies the rule of decision, the privilege of a witness, person, government, State, or political subdivision thereof shall be determined in accordance with State law.

Privilege is an important evidentiary rule, and there was a movement to codify key privileges in the Federal Rules of Evidence. But this movement did not succeed, and today's rules do not expressly state which privileges are recognized and which are not. The privileges themselves remain common law—traditional rules which are periodically redefined by the courts.

The privileges that may be invoked in federal court include:

Attorney-client privilege
Covers all communications between an attorney, their client, and any other associates within the scope of the attorney's representation of the client. The client waives the privilege if they disclose the privileged information to a third party. There are several exceptions: the attorney may break privilege to prevent the client's commission of a dangerous criminal offense, and should break privilege when he or she knows that the client is lying to the court. The attorney can also use privileged information to rectify any fraudulent or criminal behavior perpetrated by the client with the attorney's unknowing assistance. Attorney-client privilege can also be broken when there is an issue of the attorney breaking his or her duty to the client (malpractice) or of the client breaking his or her duty to the attorney (failure to pay fees). See Proposed Rule 503, which was rejected by Congress but contains good guidelines to the scope of the attorney-client privilege.

Spousal privilege
Confidential communications between spouses within the martial context are subject to spousal privilege.

Priest-penitent privilege
Under common law, a penitent may keep their disclosures to their priest under privilege. (The privilege belongs to the priest under Catholic canon law, and may only be broken with a dispensation from the cardinal, which can only be obtained with the permission of the Pope.)

title: Federal Rules of Evidence/Privileges