text:
United States Federal Sentencing Guidelines

The United States Federal Sentencing Guidelines are rules published by the U.S. Sentencing Commission that set out a uniform policy for sentencing individuals and organizations convicted of felonies and serious (Class A) misdemeanors in the United States federal courts system. The Guidelines do not apply to less serious misdemeanors or infractions.

Although the Guidelines were initially styled as mandatory, the US Supreme Court's 2005 decision in United States v. Booker held that the Guidelines, as originally constituted, violated the Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury, and the remedy chosen was to excise those provisions of the law establishing the Guidelines as mandatory. After Booker and other Supreme Court cases, such as Blakely v. Washington (2004), the Guidelines are now considered advisory only. Federal judges (state judges are not affected by the Guidelines) must calculate the guidelines and consider them when determining a sentence, but are not required to issue sentences within the guidelines.

Enabling legislation
The Guidelines are the product of the United States Sentencing Commission, which was created by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. The Guidelines' primary goal was to alleviate sentencing disparities that research had indicated were prevalent in the existing sentencing system, and the guidelines reform was specifically intended to provide for determinate sentencing. This refers to sentencing whose actual limits are determined at the time the sentence is imposed, as opposed to indeterminate sentencing, in which a sentence with a maximum (and, perhaps, a minimum) is pronounced but the actual amount of time served in prison is determined by a parole commission or similar administrative body after the person has started serving his or her sentence. As part of the guidelines reform in 1984, parole on federal level was abolished.

The federal effort followed guidelines projects in several states, initially funded by the United States Department of Justice, and led by Jack Kress and his research team during the late 1970s. The first sentencing guidelines jurisdictions were county-wide, in Denver, Newark, Chicago and Philadelphia. Statewide guidelines systems were next established in Utah, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Michigan, Washington, and Delaware, before the federal sentencing guidelines were formally adopted in 1987. Given that the vast majority of criminal sentencing is done at the state level, the American Law Institute and the American Bar Association have each recommended such systems for all the states, and nearly half the states presently have such systems, although significant variations exist among them. For example, Minnesota's Sentencing Guidelines Commission initially sought consciously not to increase prison capacity through guidelines. That is, Minnesota assumed that the legislature should determine how much would be spent on prisons and that the sentencing commission's job was to allocate those prison beds in as rational a way as possible. The federal effort took the opposite approach. It determined how many prisons would be needed and Congress was then essentially required to fund those beds.

Promulgation and modification
In drafting the first set of guidelines, the Commission used data drawn from 10,000 presentence investigations, the differing elements of various crimes as distinguished in substantive criminal statutes, the United States Parole Commission's guidelines and statistics, and data from other sources in order to determine which distinctions were important in pre-guidelines practice. Sentencing criteria already in use by judges was thus codified as guidelines. The Commission essentially codified existing practice. Future modifications often reflected Congressional mandates, as in the case of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 that imposed increased and mandatory minimum sentences.

In 2003, Congress considered the Feeney Amendment to the PROTECT Act. This amendment would have totally rewritten the guidelines. Among other changes, the original amendment would have eliminated all unenumerated downward departures and all downward departures for family ties, diminished capacity, aberrant behavior, educational or vocational skills, mental or emotional conditions, employment record, good works, or overstated criminal history. Defense lawyers, law professors, current and former Sentencing Commissioners, the President of the American Bar Association, Chief Justice William Rehnquist, and others wrote to Congress opposing the amendment. The enacted bill limited the changes described above to crimes involving pornography, sexual abuse, child sex, and child kidnapping and trafficking. It also raised penalties for child pornography and child sex abuse. It also greatly increased prosecutorial discretion and influence by limiting judges' power to depart from the guidelines and granting prosecutors greater power over departures. For instance, it made a prosecutorial motion a prerequisite for a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility. It also instructed the Sentencing Commission to authorize four-level "fast-track" downward departures in illegal-reentry immigration cases upon motion of the prosecutor.

United States v. Booker
Though the Federal Sentencing Guidelines were styled as mandatory, the Supreme Court's 2005 decision in United States v. Booker found that the Guidelines, as originally constituted, violated the Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury, and the chosen remedy was excision of those provisions of the law establishing the Guidelines as mandatory. In the aftermath of Booker and other Supreme Court cases, such as Blakely v. Washington (2004), Guidelines are now considered advisory only. Federal judges (state judges are not affected by the Guidelines) must calculate the guidelines and consider them when determining a sentence but are not required to issue sentences within the guidelines. Those sentences are still, however, subject to appellate review. The frequency in which sentences are imposed that exceed the range stated in the Guidelines has doubled in the years since the Booker decision.

Guidelines basics
The Guidelines determine sentences based primarily on two factors: The Sentencing Table in the Guidelines Manual shows the relationship between these two factors; for each pairing of offense level and criminal history category, the Table specifies a sentencing range, in months, within which the court may sentence a defendant. For example, for a defendant convicted on an offense with a total offense level of 22 and a criminal history category of I, the Guidelines recommend a sentence of 41–51 months. If, however, a person with an extensive criminal history (Category VI) committed the same offense in the same manner in the same modern timeline and not during the older guideline periods, the Guidelines would recommend a sentence of 84–105 months.
 * 1) the conduct associated with the offense (the offense conduct, which produces the offense level)
 * 2) the defendant's criminal history (the criminal history category)

Offense level
There are 43 offense levels. The offense level of a defendant is determined by looking up the offense in Chapter 2 and applying any applicable adjustments. The originally proposed sentencing guidelines had 360 levels, and there are proposals to substantially reduce the current number of offense levels.

Criminal history
There are six criminal history categories. Each category is associated with a range of criminal history points. Thus, for example, a defendant with 0 or 1 criminal history points would be in Criminal History Category I, while a defendant with 13 or more criminal history points would be in Criminal History Category VI. The criminal history points are calculated by adding 3 points for each prior sentence of imprisonment exceeding one year and one month; adding 2 points for each prior sentence of imprisonment of at least sixty days but not more than 13 months; adding 1 point for each prior sentence of less than sixty days; adding 2 points if the defendant committed the instant offense while under any criminal justice sentence, including probation, parole, supervised release, imprisonment, work release, or escape status; adding 2 points if the defendant committed the instant offense less than two years after release from imprisonment on a sentence of sixty days or more or while in imprisonment or escape status on such a sentence, except that if 2 points are added committing the offense while under a criminal justice sentence, adding only 1 point for this item; and adding 1 point for each prior sentence resulting from a conviction of a crime of violence that did not receive any points because such sentence was counted as a single sentence, up to a total of 3 points for this item.

The guidelines require "counting prior adult diversionary dispositions if they involved a judicial determination of guilt or an admission of guilt in open court." This reflects a policy that defendants who previously received the benefit of a rehabilitative sentence and then commit further crimes should not be treated with further leniency.

Zones
There are four sentencing zones: A, B, C, and D. Zone A consists of sentencing ranges of 0–6 months. Zone B consists of sentencing ranges above Zone A but with a maximum penalty of no more than 15 months. Zone C consists of sentencing ranges above Zone B but whose maximum penalty is 18 months or less. Zone D consists of sentencing ranges above Zone C.

A defendant in Zone A is eligible for Federal Probation, and no term of imprisonment is required. Probation is also authorized if the applicable guideline range is in Zone B of the Sentencing Table and the court imposes a condition or combination of conditions requiring intermittent confinement, community confinement, or home detention as provided in, but at least one month of the sentence must be satisfied by imprisonment. A split sentence is authorized for defendants in Zone C. That is, Zone C defendants must serve at least half of their sentence in prison.

In 2010, the U.S. Sentencing Commission proposed expanding Zones B and C, in recognition of the fact that many offenders are sentenced to 12 months and 1 day in order to receive the benefit of good time under U.S. federal law.

Reductions in time to be served
A 2- or 3-level offense level decrease is typically granted for acceptance of responsibility if the defendant accepts a plea bargain. However, the decrease will not apply if the defendant demonstrates behavior, such as continued criminal activity, that is inconsistent with acceptance of responsibility.

Increase in time to be served
There are victim-related adjustments for hate crime motivation or vulnerable victims; official victims; restraint of victims; and terrorism. Adjustments can apply depending on the offender's role in the offense, which can include an aggravating role, a mitigating role. Enhancements apply for abuse of a position of trust or use of a special skill, using a minor to commit a crime, and use of body armor or a firearm in drug trafficking crimes and crimes of violence.

In addition, there are enhancements related to obstruction of justice, including obstructing or impeding the administration of justice, reckless endangerment during flight, commission of an offense while on release, and false registration of a domain name.

Adjustments also apply in cases involving multiple counts.

Departures
Departures upward or downward from the guideline range are appropriate for cases that deviate from the heartland of cases.

Departures are allowed in cases involving substantial assistance to authorities in the investigation or prosecution of another person who has committed an offense. The Sentencing Reform Act allows a departure below the applicable statutory mandatory minimum in such cases. There is no penalty for refusal to assist authorities.

The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and U.S. Sentencing Guidelines require that the prosecution file a motion allowing the reduction. The court is not required to grant the reduction, and may decline to do so if it deems the information provided by the defendant to be untruthful, incomplete, unreliable, insignificant, not useful, or untimely. The Guidelines provide, "Substantial weight should be given to the government's evaluation of the extent of the defendant's assistance, particularly where the extent and value of the assistance are difficult to ascertain."

Some defendants attempt to provide substantial assistance, but their assistance is ultimately deemed not to be substantial, which prevents them from getting the departure even if they made incriminating statements.

Other grounds for departure:

"If death resulted, the court may increase the sentence above the authorized guideline range.
 * Death (§5K2.1)

Loss of life does not automatically suggest a sentence at or near the statutory maximum. The sentencing judge must give consideration to matters that would normally distinguish among levels of homicide, such as the defendant's state of mind and the degree of planning or preparation. Other appropriate factors are whether multiple deaths resulted, and the means by which life was taken. The extent of the increase should depend on the dangerousness of the defendant's conduct, the extent to which death or serious injury was intended or knowingly risked, and the extent to which the offense level for the offense of conviction, as determined by the other Chapter Two guidelines, already reflects the risk of personal injury. For example, a substantial increase may be appropriate if the death was intended or knowingly risked or if the underlying offense was one for which base offense levels do not reflect an allowance for the risk of personal injury, such as fraud."

"If significant physical injury resulted, the court may increase the sentence above the authorized guideline range. The extent of the increase ordinarily should depend on the extent of the injury, the degree to which it may prove permanent, and the extent to which the injury was intended or knowingly risked. When the victim suffers a major, permanent disability and when such injury was intentionally inflicted, a substantial departure may be appropriate. If the injury is less serious or if the defendant (though criminally negligent) did not knowingly create the risk of harm, a less substantial departure would be indicated. In general, the same considerations apply as in §5K2.1."
 * Physical injury (§5K2.2)

"If a victim or victims suffered psychological injury much more serious than that normally resulting from commission of the offense, the court may increase the sentence above the authorized guideline range. The extent of the increase ordinarily should depend on the severity of the psychological injury and the extent to which the injury was intended or knowingly risked.
 * Extreme psychological injury (§5K2.3)

Normally, psychological injury would be sufficiently severe to warrant application of this adjustment only when there is a substantial impairment of the intellectual, psychological, emotional, or behavioral functioning of a victim, when the impairment is likely to be of an extended or continuous duration, and when the impairment manifests itself by physical or psychological symptoms or by changes in behavior patterns. The court should consider the extent to which such harm was likely, given the nature of the defendant's conduct."

"If a person was abducted, taken hostage, or unlawfully restrained to facilitate commission of the offense or to facilitate the escape from the scene of the crime, the court may increase the sentence above the authorized guideline range."
 * Abduction or unlawful restraint (§5K2.4)

"If the offense caused property damage or loss not taken into account within the guidelines, the court may increase the sentence above the authorized guideline range. The extent of the increase ordinarily should depend on the extent to which the harm was intended or knowingly risked and on the extent to which the harm to property is more serious than other harm caused or risked by the conduct relevant to the offense of conviction."
 * Property damage or loss (§5K2.5)

"If a weapon or dangerous instrumentality was used or possessed in the commission of the offense the court may increase the sentence above the authorized guideline range. The extent of the increase ordinarily should depend on the dangerousness of the weapon, the manner in which it was used, and the extent to which its use endangered others. The discharge of a firearm might warrant a substantial sentence increase."
 * Weapons and dangerous instrumentalities (§5K2.6)

"If the defendant's conduct resulted in a significant disruption of a governmental function, the court may increase the sentence above the authorized guideline range to reflect the nature and extent of the disruption and the importance of the governmental function affected. Departure from the guidelines ordinarily would not be justified when the offense of conviction is an offense such as bribery or obstruction of justice; in such cases interference with a governmental function is inherent in the offense, and unless the circumstances are unusual the guidelines will reflect the appropriate punishment for such interference."
 * Disruption of governmental function (§5K2.7)

"If the defendant's conduct was unusually heinous, cruel, brutal, or degrading to the victim, the court may increase the sentence above the guideline range to reflect the nature of the conduct. Examples of extreme conduct include torture of a victim, gratuitous infliction of injury, or prolonging of pain or humiliation."
 * Extreme conduct (§5K2.8)

"If the defendant committed the offense in order to facilitate or conceal the commission of another offense, the court may increase the sentence above the guideline range to reflect the actual seriousness of the defendant's conduct."
 * Criminal purpose (§5K2.9)

"If the victim's wrongful conduct contributed significantly to provoking the offense behavior, the court may reduce the sentence below the guideline range to reflect the nature and circumstances of the offense. In deciding whether a sentence reduction is warranted, and the extent of such reduction, the court should consider the following: Victim misconduct ordinarily would not be sufficient to warrant application of this provision in the context of offenses under Chapter Two, Part A, Subpart 3 (Criminal Sexual Abuse). In addition, this provision usually would not be relevant in the context of non-violent offenses. There may, however, be unusual circumstances in which substantial victim misconduct would warrant a reduced penalty in the case of a non-violent offense. For example, an extended course of provocation and harassment might lead a defendant to steal or destroy property in retaliation."
 * Victim's conduct (§5K2.10)
 * 1) The size and strength of the victim, or other relevant physical characteristics, in comparison with those of the defendant.
 * 2) The persistence of the victim's conduct and any efforts by the defendant to prevent confrontation.
 * 3) The danger reasonably perceived by the defendant, including the victim's reputation for violence.
 * 4) The danger actually presented to the defendant by the victim.
 * 5) Any other relevant conduct by the victim that substantially contributed to the danger presented.
 * 6) The proportionality and reasonableness of the defendant's response to the victim's provocation.

"Sometimes, a defendant may commit a crime in order to avoid a perceived greater harm. In such instances, a reduced sentence may be appropriate, provided that the circumstances significantly diminish society's interest in punishing the conduct, for example, in the case of a mercy killing. Where the interest in punishment or deterrence is not reduced, a reduction in sentence is not warranted. For example, providing defense secrets to a hostile power should receive no lesser punishment simply because the defendant believed that the government's policies were misdirected.
 * Lesser harms (§5K2.11)

In other instances, conduct may not cause or threaten the harm or evil sought to be prevented by the law proscribing the offense at issue. For example, where a war veteran possessed a machine gun or grenade as a trophy, or a school teacher possessed controlled substances for display in a drug education program, a reduced sentence might be warranted."

"If the defendant committed the offense because of serious coercion, blackmail or duress, under circumstances not amounting to a complete defense, the court may depart downward. The extent of the decrease ordinarily should depend on the reasonableness of the defendant's actions, on the proportionality of the defendant's actions to the seriousness of coercion, blackmail, or duress involved, and on the extent to which the conduct would have been less harmful under the circumstances as the defendant believed them to be. Ordinarily coercion will be sufficiently serious to warrant departure only when it involves a threat of physical injury, substantial damage to property or similar injury resulting from the unlawful action of a third party or from a natural emergency. Notwithstanding this policy statement, personal financial difficulties and economic pressures upon a trade or business do not warrant a downward departure."
 * Coercion and duress (§5K2.12)

"A downward departure may be warranted if (1) the defendant committed the offense while suffering from a significantly reduced mental capacity; and (2) the significantly reduced mental capacity contributed substantially to the commission of the offense. Similarly, if a departure is warranted under this policy statement, the extent of the departure should reflect the extent to which the reduced mental capacity contributed to the commission of the offense.
 * Diminished capacity (§5K2.13)

However, the court may not depart below the applicable guideline range if (1) the significantly reduced mental capacity was caused by the voluntary use of drugs or other intoxicants; (2) the facts and circumstances of the defendant's offense indicate a need to protect the public because the offense involved actual violence or a serious threat of violence; (3) the defendant's criminal history indicates a need to incarcerate the defendant to protect the public; or (4) the defendant has been convicted of an offense under chapter 71, 109A, 110, or 117, of title 18, United States Code."

"If national security, public health, or safety was significantly endangered, the court may depart upward to reflect the nature and circumstances of the offense."
 * Public welfare (§5K2.14)

"If the defendant voluntarily discloses to authorities the existence of, and accepts responsibility for, the offense prior to the discovery of such offense, and if such offense was unlikely to have been discovered otherwise, a downward departure may be warranted. For example, a downward departure under this section might be considered where a defendant, motivated by remorse, discloses an offense that otherwise would have remained undiscovered. This provision does not apply where the motivating factor is the defendant's knowledge that discovery of the offense is likely or imminent, or where the defendant's disclosure occurs in connection with the investigation or prosecution of the defendant for related conduct."
 * Voluntary disclosure of offense (§5K2.16)

"If the defendant possessed a semiautomatic firearm capable of accepting a large capacity magazine in connection with a crime of violence or controlled substance offense, an upward departure may be warranted. A semiautomatic firearm capable of accepting a large capacity magazine' means a semiautomatic firearm that has the ability to fire many rounds without reloading because at the time of the offense (A) the firearm had attached to it a magazine or similar device that could accept more than 15 rounds of ammunition; or (B) a magazine or similar device that could accept more than 15 rounds of ammunition was in close proximity to the firearm. The extent of any increase should depend upon the degree to which the nature of the weapon increased the likelihood of death or injury in the circumstances of the particular case."
 * Semiautomatic firearms capable of accepting large capacity magazines (§5K2.17)

"If the defendant is subject to an enhanced sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 521 (pertaining to criminal street gangs), an upward departure may be warranted. The purpose of this departure provision is to enhance the sentences of defendants who participate in groups, clubs, organizations, or associations that use violence to further their ends. It is to be noted that there may be cases in which 18 U.S.C. § 521 applies, but no violence is established. In such cases, it is expected that the guidelines will account adequately for the conduct and, consequently, this departure provision would not apply."
 * Violent street gangs (§5K2.18)

 * Post-sentencing rehabilitative efforts (§5K2.19)
 * Prior to October 2010:

 * "[p]ost-sentencing rehabilitative efforts, even if exceptional, undertaken by a defendant after imposition of a term of imprisonment for the instant offense [were] not an appropriate basis for a downward departure when resentencing the defendant for that offense."

 * After Pepper v. United States (2011) but before November 1, 2012:

 * "When a defendant's sentence has been set aside on appeal, a district court at resentencing may consider evidence of the defendant's postsentencing rehabilitation, and such evidence may, in appropriate cases, support a downward variance from the now-advisory Guidelines range."

 * After November 1, 2012:

 * "Deleted."

"(a) IN GENERAL.—Except where a defendant is convicted of an offense involving a minor victim under section 1201, an offense under section 1591, or an offense under chapter 71, 109A, 110, or 117, of title 18, United States Code, a downward departure may be warranted in an exceptional case if: (b)     REQUIREMENTS.—The court may depart downward under this policy statement only if the defendant committed a single criminal occurrence or single criminal transaction that (c) PROHIBITIONS BASED ON THE PRESENCE OF CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.—The court may not depart downward pursuant to this policy statement if any of the following circumstances are present:
 * Aberrant behavior (§5K2.20)
 * 1) the defendant's criminal conduct meets the requirements of subsection (b); and
 * 2) the departure is not prohibited under subsection (c)
 * 1) was committed without significant planning;
 * 2) was of limited duration; and
 * 3) represents a marked deviation by the defendant from an otherwise law-abiding life.
 * 1) The offense involved serious bodily injury or death.
 * 2) The defendant discharged a firearm or otherwise used a firearm or a dangerous weapon.
 * 3) The instant offense of conviction is a serious drug trafficking offense.
 * 4) The defendant has either of the following: (A) more than one criminal history point, as determined under Chapter Four (Criminal History and Criminal Livelihood) before application of subsection (b) of §4A1.3 (Departures Based on Inadequacy of Criminal History Category); or (B) a prior federal or state felony conviction, or any other significant prior criminal behavior, regardless of whether the conviction or significant prior criminal behavior is countable under Chapter Four."

"The court may depart upward to reflect the actual seriousness of the offense based on conduct (1) underlying a charge dismissed as part of a plea agreement in the case, or underlying a potential charge not pursued in the case as part of a plea agreement or for any other reason; and (2) that did not enter into the determination of the applicable guideline range."
 * Dismissed and uncharged conduct (§5K2.21)

"In sentencing a defendant convicted of an offense involving a minor victim under section 1201, an offense under section 1591, or an offense under chapter 71, 109A, 110, or 117, of title 18, United States Code:
 * Specific offender characteristics as grounds for downward departure in child crimes and sexual offenses (§5K2.22)
 * 1) Age may be a reason to depart downward only if and to the extent permitted by §5H1.1.
 * 2) An extraordinary physical impairment may be a reason to depart downward only if and to the extent permitted by §5H1.4.
 * 3) Drug, alcohol, or gambling dependence or abuse is not a reason to depart downward."

"A downward departure may be appropriate if the defendant (1) has completed serving a term of imprisonment; and (2) subsection (b) of §5G1.3 (Imposition of a Sentence on a Defendant Subject to Undischarged Term of Imprisonment) would have provided an adjustment had that completed term of imprisonment been undischarged at the time of sentencing for the instant offense. Any such departure should be fashioned to achieve a reasonable punishment for the instant offense."
 * Discharged terms of imprisonment (§5K2.23)

"If, during the commission of the offense, the defendant wore or displayed an official, or counterfeit official, insignia or uniform received in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 716, an upward departure may be warranted."
 * Commission of offense while wearing or displaying unauthorized or counterfeit insignia or uniform (§5K2.24)

Controversies
Among the controversial aspects of the Sentencing Guidelines have been the 100:1 disparity between treatment of crack and cocaine (which has been amended to 18:1 by the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010) and the immigration guidelines which call for hefty enhancements for illegal re-entrants with prior felony records, despite the prior offenses already being taken into account via the Criminal History Category. Heavy penalties for child pornography offenders have also come under fire. Many judges are refusing to apply the Guidelines in these cases.

It has been argued that the Sentencing Guidelines actually increase unwarranted sentencing disparities. Joseph S. Hall writes, "Factors such as whether or not the defendant can afford a skilled attorney capable of making innovative legal arguments or performing detailed factual investigations have a profound influence on a defendant's sentence. The prosecutor's power to extract guilty pleas, previously held in check by judges, is now counterbalanced only by the diligence of the defense attorney." William J. Stuntz claims that "when necessary, the litigants simply bargain about what facts will (and won't) form the basis for sentencing. It seems to be an iron rule: guidelines sentencing empowers prosecutors, even where the guidelines' authors try to fight that tendency ... In short, plea bargains outside the law's shadow depend on prosecutors' ability to make credible threats of severe post-trial sentences. Sentencing guidelines make it easy to issue those threats."

The federal guilty plea rate has risen from 83% in 1983 to 96% in 2009, a rise attributed largely to the Sentencing Guidelines.

Sentencing table
The sentencing table is an integral part of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines.

The Offense Level (1–43) forms the vertical axis of the Sentencing Table. The Criminal History Category (I–VI) forms the horizontal axis of the Table. The intersection of the Offense Level and Criminal History Category displays the Guideline Range in months of imprisonment. "Life" means life imprisonment. For example, the guideline range applicable to a defendant with an Offense Level of 15 and a Criminal History Category of III is 24–30 months of imprisonment. If all counts that carry the maximum sentence of 5–40 years total the level to 43 and above, then a life sentence is restricted. For a defendant under the Juvenile Delinquency Act, the sentence is 50 years for Levels 43 and up.

Fines
For individuals, the fine table is as follows:

The Guidelines state that the court can impose a fine above the maximum set out in the table if the defendant is convicted under a statute authorizing a maximum fine greater than $250,000, or a fine for each day of violation. The court can waive the fine if the defendant is unlikely to be able to pay or if the fine would unduly burden the defendant's dependents; however, the Guidelines state that the court must still impose a total combined sanction that is punitive.

Probation and supervised release
The Guidelines state that the term of probation shall be at least one year but not more than five years if the offense level is 6 or greater, and no more than three years in any other case. The Guidelines provide that the term of supervised release under U.S. federal law shall be at least three years but not more than five years for a defendant convicted of a Class A or B felony; at least two years but not more than three years for a defendant convicted of a Class C or D felony; and one year for a defendant convicted of a Class E felony or a Class A misdemeanor. However, a life term of supervised release may be imposed for any offense listed in, the commission of which resulted in, or created a foreseeable risk of, death or serious bodily injury to another person; or a sex offense. Supervised release is recommended by the Guidelines for most offenders who are serving a prison sentence of more than a year.


text:
Talk:Apheresis

Untitled
i tried to make it more organized, and enable normal people to follow the basic concepts. i did not really write or delete anything, i just moved things around, added headers, made it more wikipedia-ish.

i am sorry if i made any errors.. please correct them... or revert the whole thing if you like...

what does intravenous immunoglobin have to do with apheresis
also, i am having a hard time understanding how IVIG has anything to do with apheresis.

as far as therapy, apparently IVIG is administered as an IV?

as far as donation, it comes from thousands of donors... are you saying most of those donors haven given blood through some sort of apheresis? what sort of apheresis? how is the blood from which comes IVIG, any different from ordinary non-apheresis blood donations?

if anyone can fix this please help.

=
======================================================= I agree with your concern. IVIG is used as an alternate to apheresis (specifically plasma exchange) for many neurologic diseases (AIDP, CIDP) and has been found to be equivalent to plasma exchange with regard to outcomes though it is substantially more exppensive. i think that this section should be deleted. It is not relevant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pathdoc1984 (talk • contribs) 21:26, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I have deleted the section on IVIG after reviewing the IVIG page. Discussing the equivalency of plasma exchange and IVIG here would be redundant with what is on the IVIG page and is inappropriate, in my opinion, with the fact that this is a more generic description of apheresis. once could consider adding it to the plasma exchange page ut I would not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pathdoc1984 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

copyright violation & rewrite
This article is clearly related to at least the following website: http://medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/BLDBANK/BBAPHER.html

If this was an authorized copy of information, could you please post the license status here on the talk page? --Chinasaur 23:54, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * You're right, it's a copyvio. I've sent an email to eklatt@mailer.fsu.edu for permission to use the material. If the answer is negative, I will treat it as a copyvio. JFW | T@lk  09:14, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Professor Klatt was not pleased, so I'm listing this on WP:CP and I've undertaken a rewrite. JFW | T@lk  18:29, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Reluctantly, I have rewritten the page in a more concise form. I removed the pictures. The first one needs review for ?copyvio, and the blood donation picture does not pertain here (apheresis needs two needles). Finally, there was no room for the platelet bag. Please complain on my talk page. JFW | T@lk  19:05, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * (apheresis needs two needles) <- right and wrong!
 * I've been a platelet donor for over a deacde. In the early 90s, there were only two-needle models. But today there are many models that use the same tube to draw and return blood. These pictures were taken by me three days ago. I was the donor. It was a single-arm model. Not every platelet donor can use the single arm machine. You need to have a larger and stronger vein. You also have to be over 50 kg in weight. There are few models that can separate about 500 ml (2 units) of platelets in less than 2 hours. Most of them are still using two needles. But today's newer single unit machines are single-arm models. Dual-arm models are older ones or reserved for people whose veins are too thin. I knew there's a single-arm two-unit model. But I have not tried it. -- Toytoy 12:53, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)

 * Wow, that sucks; I would have thought we were going to get permission for this one. Thanks for the rewrite, I'll work on it this week if I see anything I can add.  Didn't the picture of blood separation come from the other website too (unfortunately...)?

What did you mean "the picture of blood separation"? The pictures taken by a cheap cellphone camera were mine. And the bell-shaped line-drawing seperator was drawn by someone else for Wikipedia. I think all pictures are OK. However, I will redraw the bell-shaped seperator because it is not empty inside. It has a core. See my picure for details. I will take more pictures next week when I donate platelet again. I have not much time this week. -- Toytoy 05:30, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

 * No, it was the diagram drawn by Viki. It is actually original. JFW | T@lk  16:03, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Haemonetics patents

 * 6,743,192 Apheresis apparatus and method for producing blood products
 * 5,769,811 Blood-processing machine system
 * 5,607,579 Apheresis apparatus for separating an intermediate density component from whole blood
 * 5,494,592 Apheresis apparatus and method

These U.S. patents provide you with very detailed drawings and explainations. -- Toytoy 15:42, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

 * Yeah, and that is one manufacturer. We should really aim to make generic diagrams, not ones that are linked to one particular type of apheresis machine. JFW | T@lk  16:03, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * If I have time, I'll check if their diagrams can be simplified or generalized. These patents are public domain and they are of very high quality. It will be good to use them. Since I am a Haemonetics user, I actually do not know how other machines work. But I have two blood transfusion handbooks that mentioned about this subject. -- Toytoy 16:23, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

 * In fact, patents are great resources of usable public domain texts. For example, here's a the BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION section taken from the U.S. patent #6,613,009:

 * One type of extracorporeal blood processing is an apheresis procedure in which blood is removed from a donor or patient, directed to a blood component separation device (e.g., centrifuge), and separated into various blood component types (e.g., red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets, plasma) for collection or therapeutic purposes. One or more of these blood component types are collected (e.g., for therapeutic purposes), while the remainder are returned to the donor or patient.

 * A number of factors affect the commercial viability of an apheresis system. One factor relates to the operator of the system, specifically the time and/or expertise required of an individual to prepare and operate the apheresis system. For instance, reducing the time required by the operator to load and unload the disposables, as well as the complexity of these actions, can increase productivity and/or reduce the potential for operator error. Moreover, reducing the dependency of the system on the operator may lead to reductions in operator errors and/or to reductions in the credentials esired/required for the operators of these systems.

 * Donor-related factors may also impact the commercial viability of an apheresis system and include donor convenience and donor comfort. For instance, donors typically have only a certain amount of time which may be committed to visiting a blood component collection facility for a donation. Consequently, once at the collection facility the amount of the donor's time which is actually spent collecting blood components is another factor which should be considered. This also relates to donor comfort in that many view the actual collection procedure as being somewhat discomforting in that at least one and sometimes two access needles are in the donor throughout the procedure.

 * Performance-related factors continue to affect the commercial viability of an apheresis system. Performance may be judged in terms of the "collection efficiency" of the apheresis system, which may in turn reduce the amount of donation time and thus increase donor convenience. The "collection efficiency" of a system may of course be gauged in a variety of ways, such as by the amount of a particular blood component type which is collected in relation to the number of this blood component type which passes through the apheresis system. Performance may also be evaluated based upon the effect which the apheresis procedure has on the various blood component types. For instance, it is desirable to minimize the adverse effects on the blood component types as a result of the apheresis procedure (e.g., reduce platelet activation)

 * With a little re-write and copy-edit, you may turn the above text into usable material. There are other patents that talked much more about the technological background than this. -- Toytoy 17:33, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

 * Actually, I may be able to take some pictures of the U.S. patent #6,613,009 machine on December 29. It's a totally different machine produced by another company. -- Toytoy 17:40, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

-

The American Red Cross is now also performing red blood cell apheresis. I did the "double red" procedure last week. http://www.giveblood.org/donor_quad/double_rbc.htm

If taking Leukocytes is Leukapheresis, would this procedure be Erythrapheresis? Ubermonkey 23:27, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Literary representation of aphersis
Sarah Manguso's 2008 memoir The Two Kinds of Decay features extensive descriptions of undergoing apherisis (as part of a treatment for Chronic Idiopathic Demyelinating Polyneuropathy), focusing on both the physiological and psychological nature of the experience. Would a mention of this be appropriate, or do you think it outside the scope of the article? Cazlem (talk) 04:32, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

No gloves?
The technician in the photos is wearing no gloves. Can we find a photo that better represents modern knowledge of infectious agents? — Rootbeer (Tom) (U 19:29, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Clarity
Under 'leukapheresis,' under 'Donor' section, the term 'HES' is used. Is this Hydroxyethyl starch? Can someone confirm or deny? Either way, it would be best to clarify the meaning/definition of 'HES' and exactly how/why it is used (or not). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.177.1.217 (talk) 12:32, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 one external links on Apheresis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070705090407/http://www.cc.nih.gov:80/dtm/dtm_double_red_cell.htm to http://www.cc.nih.gov/dtm/dtm_double_red_cell.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090117033956/http://www.fda.gov/cber/recalls/baxaphe013105.htm to http://www.fda.gov/CbER/recalls/baxaphe013105.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050408114722/http://medlib.med.utah.edu:80/WebPath/TUTORIAL/BLDBANK/BBAPHER.html to http://medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/BLDBANK/BBAPHER.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041205170749/http://medlib.med.utah.edu:80/WebPath/TUTORIAL/BLDBANK/BBPROC.html to http://medlib.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/BLDBANK/BBPROC.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081103014400/http://www.thebloodconnection.org:80/blood_products.aspx to http://www.thebloodconnection.org/blood_products.aspx#platelets

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:15, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Additional subsection on Pediatrics
I am graduate student, as part of my assignment I would like to add a Pediatric component to this article. It would discuss current practices specific to pediatrics. Thoughts? Mdimola (talk) 00:24, 23 September 2021 (UTC) pediatric I'd like to add to Types of apheresis Mdimola (talk) 15:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Apheresis


text:
Pinhal Novo

Pinhal Novo is a town in Portugal situated in the Setúbal Peninsula halfway between Lisbon and Setúbal. It is a civil parish of the Palmela Municipality. The population in 2011 was 25,000, in an area of 54.44 km2. It is served by two highways connecting Lisbon to the South and by its new train station that has enabled residents to connect directly to Lisbon's subway network in 38 minutes since October 2004. It is located near the Arrabida Natural Park and many of facilities, such as shopping centres including Forum Montijo, the Alcochete Freeport, Pinô Shopping Centre and Mochos, two of the most popular Portuguese shopping companies.

The city is experiencing continuous growth and has expanded from a little village a few years ago to a planned 40, 000 resident city. It benefits from new infrastructure, and urbanisation plans do not allow large buildings, which contributes to a certain quality of life.

title: Pinhal Novo


text:
Talk:Time Again and World

Isn't the actual title Time Again and World instead of ''Time Enough and World? Q0 23:58, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC); Q0 00:44, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It is. I fixed it. --Bacteria 09:19, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Time Again and World


text:
Heslington Church

Heslington Church is in the parish (and village) of Heslington, near York, England. As well as the village and some more modern housing estates, the church also serves some outlying farms. The Heslington campus of the University of York is also in the parish.

It is a local ecumenical partnership between the Church of England and the Methodist Church, making it one of few joint Methodist/Anglican churches. It was formed from Saint Paul's Church, Heslington and Heslington Methodist Chapel in 1971, the name of the combined church being "Heslington Church", though some people still incorrectly refer to it as "St Paul's". The old Methodist Chapel is now the village meeting room.

History
The earliest record of the parish of Heslington is in 1299; it was from that time until 1842 subject to the peculiar jurisdiction of the Prebend of Ampleforth. The advowson passed to the Archbishop of York in 1842.

Originally constructed in 1858, the building still looks like a Victorian parish church from the south. It was extended in the 1970s by the ecclesiastical architect Ronald Sims; he removed the old north wall, and added a modern suite of meeting rooms, including a vestry and kitchen, on the north side. The old choir and sanctuary now form a separate chapel, and the congregation sits in a semicircle facing the new altar to the north. Sims's design makes use of exposed breeze blocks and concrete lintels which are not to everyone's taste. The building is now a Grade II listed building.

Each denomination in the ecumenical partnership is represented by a member of clergy; the Anglican vicar is Rev. Adam Romanis, also vicar of St. Lawrence's Church on Lawrence Street, while John Schofield, Methodist chaplain to the University of York, represents the Methodist Church. Services are conducted from a combined liturgy, written by the church.

Services and meetings
Sunday services take place at 10.00am. Aside from the usual midweek meetings, the church also plays host to various university groups throughout the week.

title: Heslington Church


text:
Mount Morris Dam

The Mount Morris Dam is a concrete gravity dam on the Genesee River. It is located at the northern end of Letchworth State Park, south of Rochester, New York in the towns of Leicester and Mount Morris in Livingston County, New York. It is the largest dam of its type east of the Mississippi River and its purpose is to mitigate downstream flooding between Mount Morris and Lake Ontario.

History
The Mt. Morris Dam was built between 1948 and 1952 by the Buffalo District office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The project was authorized by the United States Congress in the Flood Control Act of 1944 at a cost of $25 million.

Prior to the construction of the dam, the Genesee River Valley and the city of Rochester had experienced periodic flooding. The flood of 1865, which developed flows exceeding 24 e6USgal per minute, resulted in massive destructions with flows equating to half the flows of Niagara Falls. Severe floods occurred every seven years on average between 1865 and 1950. Prior projects in Rochester, including retaining walls and a deepening of the river, were insufficient to stop a major flood event.

The USACE states that, in the years since the completion of the dam, an estimated $1 billion in flooding damages have been prevented. In June 1972, Hurricane Agnes passed over the Genesee Valley, causing over 7 inches of rain to fall across the entire valley in a short period of time. The water inflow due to Hurricane Agnes exceeded the storage capacity of the reservoir and it was necessary to release water through the gates of the dam, causing minor downstream flooding. These releases were made to prevent overtopping of the spillway. Had the spillway overtopped, accumulated debris in the reservoir would have passed downstream, causing log jams and additional damage. Inflows of this magnitude are only expected to happen an average of every 300 years. An estimated $210 million in damages was prevented by the dam during the storm.

Commemorations
June 2002 commemorated the 50th anniversary of the completion of Mount Morris Dam. A celebration and dedication of the commemorative kiosk was held to honor and recognize the men and women employed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Buffalo District and Mount Morris Dam Builders, 1948–1952. The kiosk rests on a foundation of bricks, each of which is inscribed with the name and occupation of the builders.

Visiting Centers
The William B. Hoyt II Visitor Center at Mount Morris Dam, opened by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 1999, was built to accommodate the thousands of people who visit the dam each year. This 5400 sqft center features a large atrium, museum, theater and public restroom facilities.

Project facts
General Distance from mouth of Genesee River: 67 mi. Drainage area above dam: 1075 sqmi. Drainage area below dam: 1391 sqmi.

Dam Type: Concrete Gravity/Dry. Total length: 1028 ft. Top width: 20 ft. Maximum height above river bed:  230 ft. Top elevation: 790 ft above sea level.

Spillway Total length: 550 ft. Crest elevation:  760 ft.

Reservoir Length in River Miles: 17 mi at Maximum flood control pool. Water Surface Elevation: 760 ft above sea level at Maximum flood control pool. Storage Volume: 301853 acre.ft at Maximum flood control pool.

Outlet Works Type: Rectangular conduits. Location: Base of spillway.

title: Mount Morris Dam


text:
List of Sri Lankan musicians

This is a list of notable Sri Lankan musicians (music artists and bands) from all genres.

The musicians/bands are listed according to the alphabetical order by first name.

A

 * Ajith Bandara
 * Allen Ratnayake
 * Amarasiri Peiris
 * Ananda Samarakone
 * Annesley Malewana
 * Anton Jones
 * Anil Mihiripenna
 * Athma Liyanage

B

 * Bathiya Jaykody

C

 * Ceylon Manohar
 * C.T. Fernando
 * Chandrasena Hettiarachchi
 * Chandralekha Perera
 * Chitral Somapala
 * Clarence Wijewardane
 * Cliff Foenander

D

 * Dasun Madushan
 * Desmond de Silva
 * Dinesh Subasinghe
 * Dhanith Sri
 * Dushyanth Weeraman

E

 * Eddie Jayamanne
 * Edward Jayakody

F

 * Freddie Silva

G

 * Gunadasa Kapuge
 * Mohammed Gauss
 * The Gypsies

H

 * H. R. Jothipala
 * Henry Caldera

I

 * Iraj Weeraratne
 * Indrachapa Liyanage
 * Indrani Karunarathne

J

 * J. P. Chandrababu
 * J. A. Milton Perera
 * Jackson Anthony
 * Jagath Wickramasinghe

K

 * Kamal Addararachchi
 * Karunarathna Divulgane
 * Kasun Kalhara
 * Keerthi Pasquel
 * Kumar Navaratnam
 * Keith Potger

L

 * Lahiru Perera
 * Lakshman Joseph De Saram
 * Latha Walpola
 * La Bambas
 * Lionel Ranwala

M

 * Mariazelle Goonetilleke
 * Mathangi Arulpragasam
 * Mercy Edirisinghe
 * Mignonne Fernando
 * Milton Mallawarachchi
 * Mohideen Baig
 * The Moonstones
 * M. S. Fernando

N

 * Nuwandhika Senarathne
 * Nadeeka Guruge
 * Namal Udugama
 * Nanda Malini
 * Narada Disasekara
 * Neela Wickramasinghe
 * Nimal Mendis
 * Nihal Nelson
 * Nalin Jayawardena
 * Nirosha Virajini

P

 * Pandith Amaradeva
 * Paranoid Earthling
 * Paul Fernando
 * Premasiri Khemadasa
 * Priya Suriyasena
 * Prince Udaya Priyantha

R

 * R. Muttusamy
 * Ravi Kesavaram
 * Rohan de Saram
 * Rookantha Gunathilake
 * Rukmani Devi
 * Rukshan Perera
 * Rohana Weerasinghe
 * Ranidu Lankage

S

 * Sadiris Master
 * Saheli Rochana Gamage
 * Sanath Nandasiri
 * Santhush Weeraman
 * Shihan Mihiranga
 * Sisira Senaratne
 * Som Wardner
 * Stanley Peiris
 * Stigmata
 * Sunflowers
 * Sunil Edirisinghe
 * Sujatha Aththanayaka
 * Sunil Perera
 * Sunil Santha
 * Sahan Ranwala

T

 * T. M. Jayaratne
 * Tanya Ekanayaka
 * Tariq Hisny
 * Tharanga Goonetilleke

U

 * Umaria Sinhawansa
 * Upali Kannangara

V

 * Victor Ratnayake
 * Vijaya Kumaranatunga
 * Vivienne de Silva Boralessa

W

 * W. D. Amaradeva

Y

 * Yolande Bavan

title: List of Sri Lankan musicians


text:
Constitution of Maryland

The current Constitution of the State of Maryland, which was ratified by the people of the state on September 18, 1867, forms the basic law for the U.S. state of Maryland. It replaced the short-lived Maryland Constitution of 1864 and is the fourth constitution under which the state has been governed. It was last amended in 2022.

At approximately 47,000 words (including annotations), the Maryland Constitution is much longer than the average length of a state constitution in the United States, which is about 26,000 words (the United States Constitution is about 8,700 words long).

Background, drafting, and ratification
The state's 1864 constitution was written during the Civil War, while the Unionists temporarily controlled Maryland. Approved by a bare majority (50.31%) of the state's eligible voters, including Maryland men who were serving in the Union army outside the state, it temporarily disfranchised the approximately 25,000 men in Maryland who had fought for the Confederacy or in other ways supported it, in an effort to bring change to the state. Also, while the state's remaining slaves were emancipated by constitutional amendment, the 1864 constitution changed the basis of representation in the General Assembly to help keep power in the hands of the white elite.

The Constitution of 1867 was drafted by a convention which met at the state capital, Annapolis, between May 8 and August 17, 1867. It was submitted to the adult white male citizens of the state for ratification on September 18 and was approved by a vote of 47,152 to 23,036. It took effect on October 5, 1867.

Declaration of Rights
The Maryland Constitution begins with a Declaration of Rights, which is similar to the U.S. Bill of Rights but, like most state bills of rights, is broader than the federal version. Among other things, the Maryland Constitution guarantees trial by jury, due process, freedom of the press, and of religion. It also forbids, among other things, the passage of ex post facto laws and cruel and unusual punishment. Notably, juries in criminal cases are declared to be judges of law as well as fact, thus ensconcing in the constitution the right of (what is commonly called) jury nullification—commonplace in the early 19th century. By 1867 this principle was already in decline as a result of abuse (in such conflicts as the Mormons in Nauvoo, Illinois and the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850), and today very much the minority position. The right of the jury to be judge of the law has since been declared unconstitutional, at least with respect to matters implicating federal constitutional rights, by the Supreme Court of Maryland in Unger vs. Maryland (2012).

While the Declaration of Rights does say that "a well regulated Militia is the proper and natural defence of a free Government," it does not guarantee a right to bear arms. The Maryland Constitution is one of the few state constitutions that lacks the equivalent of the federal Second Amendment.

Reflecting Maryland's history of religious toleration, it limits the guarantee against religious disabilities to those who believe in God and divine rewards and punishments. Article 36 includes the wording: "nor shall any person, otherwise competent, be deemed incompetent as a witness, or juror, on account of his religious belief; provided, he believes in the existence of God, and that under His dispensation such person will be held morally accountable for his acts, and be rewarded or punished therefor either in this world or in the world to come."

A unanimous 1961 decision by US Supreme court in the case of Torcaso v. Watkins found that an attempt to enforce this provision violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. In 1970, this article was amended to include the sentence "Nothing in this article shall constitute an establishment of religion". The original wording of the article was left in place, presumably as symbolic rather than effective.

Maryland's Constitution describes the separation of powers doctrine, which is implied in the federal constitution. The Maryland Constitution states that "the Legislative, Executive and Judicial powers of Government ought to be forever separate and distinct from each other; and no person exercising the functions of one of said Departments shall assume or discharge the duties of any other."

Elective Franchise
Article I defines the requirements for holding elections, the qualifications to be allowed to vote, and penalties for voter misconduct (such as intentionally voting in a district one does not reside in, or voting more than once in an election).

Executive Department
Article II creates the offices of Governor and Lieutenant Governor, establishes the qualifications for candidates, the rules for counting ballots, deciding who shall become governor or Lieutenant governor in the event of a tie, impeachment for misconduct, and the process for replacement if the office becomes vacant temporarily or permanently due to death, resignation, disability or impeachment.

Legislative Department
Article III creates the Legislature, styled the General Assembly, separated into two houses, a Senate and House of delegates, defines the qualification and number of members of each house, the means of election and provisions for removal from office for misconduct, and process for replacement of members whose office becomes vacant.

Judicial Department
Article IV creates the Supreme Court of Maryland and various lower courts, sets the requirement for judges, length of tenure, and removal from office. It also provides for a Sheriff to be elected for each county.

Attorney General and State's Attorney
Article V creates the office of the Attorney General and a State's Attorney in each county, provides for their election, qualifications for candidates, procedure for impeachment and replacement in the event the office becomes vacant.

Treasury Department
Article VI creates a Treasury Department and establishes the procedure for appointment of a Comptroller and a Treasurer, as well as their duties, procedure for removal for misconduct and replacement if the office becomes vacant.

Sundry Officers
Article VII provides for the election of County Commissioners.

Education
Article VIII requires the legislature to establish a set of Free Public Schools, and to support them "by taxation or other means."

Militia and Military Affairs
Article IX provides for the creation of a Militia and for the appointment of an Adjutant General by the Governor to manage the Militia.

City of Baltimore
Article XI creates the City of Baltimore and deems it an independent city, and provides it with a mayor and a two-part City Council with a maximum 90 day period of operation, and provides for several additional sub-articles within article XI regarding the operation of the City.

Amendment process
Amendments to the constitution are proposed by the state legislature with a three-fifths vote in both chambers. Amendments must then be ratified by a simple majority of the people voting on the question in a referendum held simultaneously with the next general election. Unlike the federal constitution, when the Maryland Constitution is amended the official text of the document is edited, removing language that is no longer in force. However, most printed versions of the constitution include annotations which indicate which portions were amended or removed and at what times.

A provision in the document requires that every 20 years the people of the state be asked if a state constitutional convention should be convened. Such a convention is called if a majority of the voters request it. At the latest election where this question could be asked in 2010, the voters did not choose to call a convention.

Notable amendments
While the average state constitution has been amended approximately 115 times,, the Maryland Constitution has been amended almost 200 times, most recently in 2012. In 1910, the Digges Amendment was proposed, to increase property requirements for voter registration. It would have effectively disfranchised most African Americans and many poor whites (including recent European immigrants), as had been accomplished by other states through various means, beginning with Mississippi's new constitution of 1890. Other Maryland laws had already reduced black voter rolls, but this amendment was rejected by voters at the general election.

In 1970, voters approved an amendment that created the office of the Lieutenant Governor of Maryland. In 1972, an amendment that created the current legislative district system of the Maryland General Assembly was approved.

2008 amendments
In 2008, two amendments were proposed on the 2008 U.S. presidential election ballot for the state of Maryland. The first amendment proposed to allow early voting in state and allow qualified voters to vote at polling places outside of their home district. The amendment was approved with 72.1% of the vote. The second amendment proposed to authorize the state to issue up to five video lottery licenses for the primary purpose of raising revenue for education of children in public schools. The amendment was approved with 58.7% of the vote.

2012 amendments
In 2012, three constitutional amendments were proposed on the 2012 U.S. presidential election ballot for the state of Maryland. The first amendment proposed to require judges of the Orphans' Court for Prince George's County to have a Maryland state law license and to be a current member of the Maryland Bar Association. The amendment was approved with 87.8% of the vote. The second amendment proposed to require judges of the Orphans' Court for Baltimore County to have a Maryland state law license and to be a current member of the Maryland Bar. The amendment was approved with 88.1% of the vote. The third amendment proposed to change the point at which an elected official charged with certain crimes is suspended or removed from office. Under the amended law, an elected official would be suspended when found guilty and removed when the conviction becomes final or when pleading guilty or no contest. The amendment was approved with 88% of the vote.

title: Constitution of Maryland


text:
Willi Heeks

Willi Heeks (13 February 1922 in Moorlage – 13 August 1996 in Bocholt) was a racing driver from Germany. He participated in 2 World Championship Grands Prix, debuting on 3 August 1952. He scored no championship points.

Complete World Championship results
(key)

title: Willi Heeks


text:
Wolfgang Seidel

Wolfgang Seidel (4 July 1926 – 1 March 1987) was a racing driver from Germany. He participated in 12 Formula One World Championship Grands Prix, debuting on 2 August 1953. He scored no championship points.

Seidel often entered cars under his own name, or under the Scuderia Colonia banner. After having been refused a start at the 1962 German Grand Prix due to slowness, Seidel got in an argument with officials from the Automobilclub von Deutschland. Combined with some doubts about the level of preparation of his cars, Seidel's competition licence was withdrawn, and he offered his two cars up for sale. In spite of not having a licence, Seidel competed in the non-championship 1962 Mexican Grand Prix a few months later.

He died in 1987 of a heart attack.

Complete Formula One World Championship results
(key)

Non-Championship results
(key) (Races in bold indicate pole position) (Races in italics indicate fastest lap)

title: Wolfgang Seidel


text:
Talk:Index investing

Future?
The article says, "The idea is that technical analysis and fundamental analysis are flawed because they require the evaluation of the past performance of securities in order to predict future returns of the securities". Well, future prices depend on future events, and future events can absolutely not be known. - Jerryseinfeld 23:58, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * It sounds like you agree with the statement. mydogategodshat 00:39, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Flaw
"The flaw of these investing methods is that past market returns are no indication of future returns." This has been edited for using the POV word "flaw". Fundamental and technical analysis are controversial subjects, and this article is not a place for the debate. Shawnc 09:28, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Merger
Perhaps we can leave a short introductory paragraph in topic Index investing, then refer the reader to the topic of Index fund. --MegaHasher 21:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Index investing


text:
Virgin Prunes

Virgin Prunes were an Irish post-punk band formed in 1977 in Dublin. They disbanded in 1986 after the departure of singer Gavin Friday. The other members continued under the name the Prunes until they split up in 1991.

History
The Virgin Prunes were founded in 1977 by vocalists Guggi (né Derek Rowen), Gavin Friday (né Fionan Hanvey) and Dave-iD Busaras, guitarist Dik Evans (brother of U2's The Edge), bassist Strongman (Trevor Rowen, brother of Guggi) and drummer Pod (Anthony Murphy).

Two of the band members, Guggi and Friday, had been part of Lypton Village, a "youthful gang" in early 1970s Dublin, which had also included U2's Bono (né Paul Hewson).

Known for their outrageous and controversial stage performances, led by theatrical singer/songwriter Friday, the band began playing small shows in Dublin, gaining them a cult audience. Pod left the group and was replaced by Haa-Lacka Binttii (né Daniel Figgis). With Binttii on drums, tape loops and keyboards, the band secured a deal with Rough Trade Records. They released their first single, "Twenty Tens" on their own Baby Records label (distributed by Rough Trade) on 8 January 1981, followed by a second single, "Moments and Mine (Despite Straight Lines)", on 27 June 1981.

Two other tracks recorded with Binttii were released during 1981 before conflicts with other members forced him out of the band. "Red Nettle" was included on NME compilation C81 and "Third Secret" appeared on Cherry Red compilation Perspectives and Distortion. Work had already started on the "A New Form of Beauty" project while Bintti was with the band, but after he was replaced by Mary D'Nellon (né David Kelly) on drums, some of his tracks were rerecorded and his name was not included in the credits. He later formed the project Princess Tinymeat.

"A New Form of Beauty" was a project that originally contained four chapters and was released in various formats: a 7" single, 10" single and 12" EP released in 1981, and a cassette issued in 1982. All four parts were later collected as the A New Form of Beauty Parts 1-4 compilation album. The project also included two additional pieces, the unpublished book A New Form of Beauty 6 and the unreleased film A New Form of Beauty 7.

In November 1982, the Virgin Prunes released their debut studio album, ...If I Die, I Die (produced by Colin Newman of Wire), as well as the double 10" EP Hérésie, a French box set. Commissioned by Yann Farcy after seeing them perform at the Rex Club in Paris, Hérésie was based on a loose examination of insanity. In 1984, both Guggi and Dik Evans, unhappy with the music business, left the band. This forced drummer D'Nellon to switch to guitar and allowed Pod to return as the band's drummer. The Virgin Prunes started to record but abandoned the unreleased album Sons Find Devils.

A retrospective video titled Sons Find Devils - A Live Retrospective 1981-1983 was released in 1986 by Ikon; this video had nothing to do with the unreleased album of the same name. In April 1985, rarities compilation Over the Rainbow was released.

In July 1986, the band, now a four-piece, finally released a second studio album, The Moon Looked Down and Laughed (including recordings of music written for Sons Find Devils). Later that year, Friday left the group. His departure was confirmed in the liner notes of the band's 1987 live album The Hidden Lie, which contained a short statement confirming the band's breakup.

After disbanding as Virgin Prunes, D'Nellon, Strongman and Busaras formed an offshoot group called The Prunes, which released three albums between 1988 and 1991 (1988's Lite Fantastik, 1989's Nada, and 1991's Blossoms & Blood ). Dik Evans played on ”Lite Fantastik" while 17-year-old Justin Kavanagh (aka Valley Limberg) from the Dublin hardcore band Mutant Asylum took the helm as guitarist for "Blossoms & Blood". In 1993, Kavanagh went on to form Gormenghast and Snifferdog with Ger Griffin. Binttii's youngest brother, Jonathan Figgis, was the boy who appeared on the cover of the second Virgin Prunes single, "Moments and Mine".

In 1998, Cleopatra Records rereleased the Sons Find Devils video, along with a soundtrack album on CD. This was the first commercially available Virgin Prunes material to be released since 1993 and, for a few years, the only commercially available full-length Virgin Prunes album on compact disc (though studio recordings of the songs "Baby Turns Blue", "Pagan Lovesong" and "Caucasian Walk" had cropped up on various goth and post-punk CD compilations). Friday went on to have a reasonably successful solo career in both music and film, releasing five solo albums and several scores, while Guggi remained an influential artist in Dublin and Busaras continued to record as a solo artist in Ireland. After 20 years of self-imposed seclusion from the rock world, Dik Evans gave an overview of he and his brother The Edge's early years in U2 for the December 2005 issue of Word Magazine.

Daniel Figgis later became a composer and multimedia producer and curator, becoming composer in residence with Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown, Dublin. One of his compositions, "Post Production", a 23-section suite for four musicians, was performed at the Winter Garden Theatre in New York City in December 2006. In 2008, the Arts>World financial centre commissioned Figgis to compose and perform the sole European commission to celebrate their 20th anniversary of arts programming. His multi-disciplinary festival, "Snakes & Ladders", appeared on Broadway on 8 January 2010 at Symphony Space.

The Virgin Prunes discography was remastered and reissued on Mute Records in 2004. The set of reissues included ...If I Die, I Die, The Moon Looked Down and Laughed, Over the Rainbow, Hérésie and an album of selections from the A New Form of Beauty series. In 2006, Busaras, Guggi and Friday contributed a track to the sea shanty collection Rogue's Gallery, appearing in the track listing as Three Pruned Men.

On 4 October 2009, three original members of the band (Friday, Guggi and Dik Evans) performed two classic Virgin Prunes songs, "Sweethome Under White Clouds" and "Caucasian Walk", at Carnegie Hall as part of "An Evening with Gavin Friday and Friends", to celebrate Friday's 50th birthday. J.G. Thirlwell appeared with them as backing vocalist.

Selected compilation appearances

 * "Red Nettle" on C81 (1981, Rough Trade/NME)
 * "Third Secret" on Perspectives and Distortion (1981, Cherry Red)
 * "Jigsaw Mentallama" on Vinyl Magazine #9 flexi disc (1981, Vinyl Magazine)
 * "Mad Bird in the Wood" on Dokument: Ten Highlights in the History of Popular Music 1981>1982 (1982, Roadrunner)

Literature

 * Rolf Vasellari: The Faculties of a Broken Heart (1985, Black Sheep Press)

title: Virgin Prunes


text:
Talk:Imelda Marcos

stole billions? convicted criminal? please fix this
someone please edit this, google/Wikipedia is meant for true facts not wrong accusations. Gooskitzo (talk) 11:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

 * All fully sourced to WP:RS? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:49, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes sources came from medias that supports the obligarchs and leftists Showbizph (talk) 07:01, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

 * @Showbizph: Please provide a link to actual reliable sources that prove otherwise. Chlod (say hi!) 07:06, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Pls correct this.. for once stip being bias Showbizph (talk) 16:54, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@Chlod i agree that your article for Mrs Marcos is well provided with sources. Sources from the leftist and from medias whom nothing good to say about the Marcoses. Let me ask you one thing, Are you aware that the family was acquitted and found inocent in so many cases filed to them. That your sources wrote that when they're still undergoing that trial and how about now that they got acquitted in their so called claims? Did they took time to revise their "accusations"? Guess you have to update your outdated and must say bias article. Showbizph (talk) 15:11, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hindi ba to bias
Sino nag sulat? 49.230.48.178 (talk) 11:08, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

 * Sorry, you'll need to write in English here. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:10, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

We should correct this.. this is so bias and some are not yet proven Showbizph (talk) 06:59, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

 * Hello @Showbizph! Kindly list down what sections need to be changed and what exactly they need to be changed into. Please ensure that your desired changes are back up by sufficient sourcing as well from reliable sources in accordance with WP:RS.
 * If you have found an issue with the factuality of some of the information in this article, please feel free to show evidence that shows that they are not true from reliable sources as well Firekiino (talk) 07:07, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Bias
Whoever author this pls stop being bias. For 36 years filipinos have been brainwashed by this leftist.. Imelda Marcos was acquitted in thousand cases filed by the Aquino's using the power of government and medias to strengthen thier claims against the Marcoses.. Showbizph (talk) 16:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Your claims is blatantly wrong and does not promote neutral point of view. Seems like a pro-Marcos guy trying to start an edit war against other editors here. The almighty anomalocaris • chat 11:57, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Where are your concrete claims to prove that Imelda is finally innocent? (I'm sorry I can't allow YT conspiracy videos due to being user-generated content which is sometimes not reliable. Thanks. The almighty anomalocaris • chat 11:58, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

So... about the shoes
Are we just failing the article having only a single pair here and at Wikicommons? or there legitimately aren't actual photographs of an actual collection and this is just a successful urban myth / political hit job? — Llywelyn II   13:24, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

 * Vice has a piece here (with photos!) Howard the Duck (talk) 17:16, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Imelda Marcos


text:
Hans Herrmann

Hans Herrmann (born 23 February 1928) is a retired Formula One and sports car racing driver from Stuttgart, Germany.

In F1, he participated in 19 World Championship Grands Prix, debuting on 2 August 1953. He achieved 1 podium, and scored a total of 10 championship points.

In sports car racing, he also scored the first overall win at the 24 Hours of Le Mans for Porsche in 1970, in a Porsche 917.

After the death of Tony Brooks in 2022, Hermann became the last surviving F1 podium finisher from the 1950s.

Early career
The racing career of Herrmann, who is a baker by trade, spans from cooperation with pre-war legends like Alfred Neubauer to the beginning of the dominance of Porsche at the 24 Hours of Le Mans. He took part in now legendary road races like Mille Miglia, Targa Florio and Carrera Panamericana and is one of the few remaining witnesses of this era. Hans im Glück (lucky John) escaped from several spectacular incidents or accidents.

Herrmann had a remarkable Mille Miglia race in 1954, when the gates of a railroad crossing were lowered in the last moment before the fast train to Rome passed. Driving a very low Porsche 550 Spyder, Herrmann decided it was too late for a brake attempt anyway, knocked on the back of the helmet of his navigator Herbert Linge to make him duck, and they barely passed below the gates and before the train, to the surprise of the spectators.

Mercedes-Benz
From 1954 to 1955, he was part of the Mercedes-Benz factory team, as a junior driver behind Juan Manuel Fangio, Karl Kling, Hermann Lang and later Stirling Moss. When the Silver Arrows came back for the 1954 French Grand Prix to score a 1–2 win, Herrmann drove the fastest lap but had to retire. A podium finish at the 1954 Swiss Grand Prix was his best result in that year as he had to use older versions of the Mercedes-Benz W196, or the least reliable car.

In the 1955 Argentine Grand Prix his teammates Kling and Moss had to abandon early due to the extremely hot conditions on the southern hemisphere in January. Herrmann was called in to share his car with them for a 4th-place finish, giving one point each. Fangio won with two laps more. Hans was quick in the 1955 Mille Miglia with the Mercedes-Benz 300 SLR, comparably or even faster than Moss, but was less lucky than in 1954, as he had to abandon the race.

A crash in practice for the 1955 Monaco Grand Prix put Herrmann out for the ill-fated 1955 season, even though a comeback in the Targa Florio was intended.

Various marques
The next years saw Herrmann racing for many marques, in F1 for Cooper, Maserati and BRM. In Berlin's AVUS during the 1959 German Grand Prix the brakes of his BRM failed, he crashed in a spectacular way, being thrown out of the car and sliding along the track with the car somersaulting in the air.

With different versions of the Porsche 718 being used as a sportscar and as a Formula Two car, Herrmann scored some wins for Porsche, mainly both the 1960 12 Hours of Sebring and Targa Florio. When the open wheeled single seater version of the Porsche 718 became eligible for Formula One in 1961 due to the rule changes, the results in F1 were disappointing. Herrmann finished 15th (last) in the 1961 Dutch Grand Prix, which was the first ever F1 World Championship race to have no retirements. He left Porsche at the beginning of the 1962 season feeling that he as a local from Stuttgart was No Prophet In His Own Land compared to Californian Dan Gurney and Jo Bonnier from Sweden. Gurney scored two F1 wins (one non-championship) with the new Porsche 804, but Porsche retired from F1 anyway at the end of 1962.

Abarth
With the small cars of the Italian Abarth marque Herrmann spent 1962 to 1965 driving in minor races and hillclimbing events. He only took outright wins in lesser sports car racing events, such as at AVUS or the 500 km Nürburgring. The Abarths were hard to beat in their classes from 850cc to 1600cc, though. Being the only pro in a small team Hermann learned a lot about testing and developing, which helped him later. However, being dissatisfied with the preparation of his car for the 1965 Schauinsland practice, Hans went home to witness the birth of his son, Dino. At the end of the year he left Abarth for good to return to the manufacturer closer to his home.

Porsche
In 1966 he returned to Porsche for a comeback in the World Sportscar Championship, as Porsche started a serious effort there. Following several podium finishes with the still underpowered two liter Porsche 906 and later models, he won the 1968 24 Hours of Daytona in a 907 as well as the Sebring 12 Hours again, now together with Swiss Jo Siffert. The overall win of the 1000km Nürburgring always eluded him, even though Herrmann had taken part in each of these races at the Nürburgring since they were introduced in 1953, and had finished second three times in a row from 1968 to 1970, behind teammates Jo Siffert and/or Vic Elford.

Herrmann missed the win in the 1969 24 Hours of Le Mans with a Porsche 908 by only 120 meters, but it was he who finally scored the long-awaited first overall victory at the Le Mans 24 Hours for Porsche in 1970. He was assigned to Porsche Salzburg, the Austria-based factory-backed team owned by the Porsche family, which mainly entered cars painted red and white, the Austrian colors. In heavy rain, he and his teammate Richard Attwood survived with their Porsche 917K #23 as the best of only seven finishers.

Retirement
Half jokingly, Herrmann had promised to his wife before the Le Mans race that he would retire in case of a win there. Having witnessed fatal accidents of colleagues too many times, e.g. before the 1969 German Grand Prix when his teammate and neighbor Gerhard Mitter died, the 42-year-old announced his retirement on TV, after having driven the winning car in a parade through Stuttgart from the factory to the town hall. To get out of his contract with Porsche Salzburg, Herrmann had to recommend a replacement driver to Louise Piëch.

Using his contacts, Herrmann built a successful company for automotive supplies. He was kidnapped once in the 1990s and kept in a car trunk for many hours before escaping.

Herrmann has remained engaged in the racing community through his retirement, demonstrating historical cars at events such as the Solitude-Revival.

Complete Formula One World Championship results
(key) (Races in italics indicate fastest lap)
 * Notes
 * – Shared drive with Karl Kling and Stirling Moss

title: Hans Herrmann


text: User talk:84.47.87.248

title: User talk:84.47.87.248


text:
John Love (racing driver)

John Maxwell Lineham Love (7 December 1924 – 25 April 2005) was a Rhodesian racing driver. He participated in 10 Formula One World Championship Grands Prix, debuting on 29 December 1962. He achieved one podium, and scored a total of six championship points. He also won the 1962 British Saloon Car Championship, now known as the British Touring Car Championship. All but one of his Formula One entries were in races held within Africa, either as championship or non-championship rounds.

Love was born in Bulawayo. He attended Gifford High School. He started his car racing career in a single-seat Cooper F3 with a Manx Norton 500 cc engine after racing a Triumph Grand Prix motorcycle, which Love then-allowed Jim Redman to ride when starting his race career, in recognition of Redman's assistance in preparing and maintaining Love's Cooper.

Six times South African Formula One Champion in the 1960s, he had originally shone in the European Formula Junior firmament back in 1961–62 at the wheel of a Cooper-Austin from Ken Tyrrell's team. An unfortunate accident at Albi resulted in a very badly broken arm and effectively thwarted his chances of moving into full-time Formula One, but he came close when he was nominated as Phil Hill's replacement in the works Cooper team for the 1964 Italian Grand Prix at Monza.

He was a regular contestant in the South African Grand Prix from 1965 to 1972. He was leading the 1967 South African Grand Prix at Kyalami in his 2.7 L Climax-engined Cooper, when a misfire prompted him to make a precautionary stop for extra fuel. He dropped back to finish second behind the works Cooper-Maserati of Pedro Rodríguez.

Love would dominate racing in southern Africa in the 1960s, winning the South African Formula One Championship six times in succession from 1964 to 1969. He would also win his home race, the Rhodesian Grand Prix, six times.

He owned the Jaguar dealership in Bulawayo and had his own stock car racing team in the 1980s. He died in 2005, aged 80, from cancer, in Bulawayo.

Complete Formula One World Championship results
(key)

Complete Formula One non-championship results
(key)

Complete British Saloon Car Championship results
(key) (Races in bold indicate pole position; races in italics indicate fastest lap.)

title: John Love (racing driver)


text:
Crystal ball

A crystal ball is a crystal or glass ball commonly used in fortune-telling. It is generally associated with the performance of clairvoyance and scrying in particular. Other names include crystal sphere, gazing ball, shew stone, and show stone. In neopaganism it is sometimes called an orbuculum.

History
By the fifth century CE, scrying using crystal balls was widespread within the Roman Empire and was condemned by the early medieval Christian Church as heretical.

The tomb of Childeric I, a fifth-century king of the Franks, contained a 3.8 cm (1½") diameter transparent beryl globe. The object is similar to other globes that were later found in tombs from the Merovingian period in France and the Saxon period in England. Some of these were complete with a frame suggesting an ornamental object. It has been pointed out that these mounts are identical to those of later globes also believed to be used for magic or divination, indicating that these crystal globes may have been used for crystallomancy.

John Dee was a noted British mathematician, astronomer, astrologer, geographer, and consultant to Queen Elizabeth I. He devoted much of his life to alchemy, divination, and Hermetic philosophy, of which the use of crystal balls was often included.

Crystal gazing was a popular pastime in the Victorian era, and was claimed to work best when the Sun is at its northernmost declination. Immediately before the appearance of a vision, the ball was said to mist up from within.

The use of crystal balls for divination also has a long history with the Romani people. Fortune tellers, known as drabardi, traditionally use crystal balls as well as cards to seek knowledge about future events.

Art of scrying
The process of scrying often involves the use of crystals, especially crystal balls, in an attempt to predict the future or otherwise divine hidden information. Crystal ball scrying is commonly used to seek supernatural guidance while making difficult decisions in one's life (e.g., matters of love or finances).

When the technique of scrying is used with crystals, or any transparent body, it is known as crystallomancy or crystal gazing.

In stage magic
Crystal balls are popular props used in mentalism acts by stage magicians. Such routines, in which the performer answers audience questions by means of various ruses, are known as crystal gazing acts. One of the most famous performers of the 20th century, Claude Alexander, was often billed as "Alexander the Crystal Seer".

Optics
Optically, a crystal ball is a ball lens. For typical materials such as quartz and glass, it forms an image of distant objects slightly beyond the surface of the sphere, on the opposite side. Unlike conventional lenses, the image-forming properties are omnidirectional (independent of the direction being imaged)

This omnidirectional focusing can cause a crystal ball to act as a burning glass when it is brought into full sunlight. The image of the sun formed by a large crystal ball will burn a hand that is holding it, and can ignite dark-coloured flammable material placed near it.

Famous crystal balls
A crystal ball was among the grave-goods of the Merovingian King, Childeric I (c. 437–481 AD). The grave-goods were discovered in 1653. In 1831, they were stolen from the royal library in France where they were being kept. Few items were ever recovered. The crystal ball was not among them.

The Sceptre of Scotland has a crystal ball in its finial, honoring the tradition of their use by pagan druids. It was made in Italy in the 15th century, and was a gift to James IV from Pope Alexander VI.

The Penn Museum in Philadelphia displays the third-largest crystal ball as the central object in its Chinese Rotunda. Weighing 49 lb, the sphere is made of quartz crystal from Burma and was shaped through years of constant rotation in a semi-cylindrical container filled with emery, garnet powder, and water. The ornamental treasure was purportedly made for the Empress Dowager Cixi (1835–1908) during the Qing dynasty in the 19th century, but no evidence as to its actual origins exists. The crystal ball and an ancient Egyptian statuette which depicted the god Osiris were stolen in 1988. They were recovered three years later with no damage done to either object.

title: Crystal ball


text:
Elena Baranova

Elena Viktorovna Baranova (Елена Викторовна Баранова; born 28 January 1972) is a Russian former professional basketball player. She is a former Women's National Basketball Association (WNBA) player, where she became the first player from Europe in 1997 WNBA inaugural season, the first All-Star from Russia in 2001 and played for the New York Liberty until the 2005 season.

Career
Baranova was born in the Kirghiz Soviet Socialist Republic. She started playing professional basketball at age 16, was included to the Soviet national team at the age of 17, won European Championship at the age of 19 in 1991, and became the Olympic champion at the age of 20 in 1992.

WNBA
Baranova was assigned to the Utah Starzz on 22 January 1997 during the initial player allocation of the 1997 WNBA draft. Her debut game was played on 21 June 1997 in a 61 - 73 loss to the Sacramento Monarchs where she recorded 7 points, 7 rebounds and a tremendous 5 blocks. In her first WNBA season she led the League in blocked shots (2.25 blocks per game) and set the League's single-game record for three-point field goals with 7 of 9 on 22 July 1997 at Madison Square Garden, New York. Baranova would miss the playoffs for her first three seasons with the Starzz. The team finished 7 - 21 in 1997, 8 - 22 in 1998 and 15 - 17 in 1999. In her three seasons with the Starzz, Baranova played 77 games (starting in 65 of them) and averaged 10 points, 6.4 rebounds and 2.3 assists.

On 15 December 1999 she was traded with Utah's second-round pick in the 2000 WNBA draft to the Miami Sol (the pick would become Jameka Jones) in exchange for Kate Starbird and the 8th pick in the 2000 WNBA Draft (which turned into Tamicha Jackson). Due to an anterior cruciate ligament injury, Baranova would sit out the entire 2000 season. She would return to play in the 2001 WNBA season, still signed to the Sol, and she was awarded 'The Bud Light Shooting Champion' trophy as the League's top free-throw shooter (with 93.1%). The same 2001 season she was selected to play in WNBA All-Star Game in Orlando to become the only player from Russia to represent her country at the All-Star Weekend, where she set WNBA All-Star Game record for blocked shots (4). Helping the Sol to a 20 - 12 regular season record, Baranova reached the playoffs for the first time in here career, but the Sol unfortunately lost to the New York Liberty in the Semi-Finals.

After also missing the 2002 season, she was taken in the 2003 WNBA Dispersal draft by the New York Liberty on 24 April 2003. She stayed with the Liberty for 3 seasons, averaging 9.6 points and 6.5 rebounds in 100 games for the team. The Liberty made the playoffs in 2004 and 2005 and lost in the Eastern Conference Finals and Semi-Finals respectively.

Also known as 'Russian Queen' and 'SuperNova', Baranova is one of just 2 players in WNBA All-Time History to record over 200 three-point field goals (with 236) and 300 blocks (with 320). Although she performed just in 7 seasons, she is 7th in blocks (320), 7th in blocks per game (1.53), 12th in 3-point field goal percentage (39.1%), 14th in rebounds per game (6.4), 17th in free-throw percentage (84.5%).

Baranova's final WNBA game ever was Game 2 of the 2005 Eastern Conference First Round on 1 September 2005. Baranova had a very disappointing game, playing 27 minutes and recording 2 points on 1 - 5 FGs shooting (20% FG) and committed 3 fouls. The Liberty would lose 50 - 58 to the Indiana Fever and be eliminated from the playoffs.

International
Baranova's scoring and rebounding ability helped the Soviet national team to win gold medals at the 1991 European Championship and 1992 Olympics. She has played in 105 games for her National team (which is Russia all-time record for men and women), in which she scored over 1300 points representing her country at three Olympic Games (1992, 1996, 2004), two World championships (1998, 2002) and seven European Championships (1991, 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003). At last 3 events she appeared as the captain of Russian national team (2002 World championship, 2003 European championship, 2004 Olympic Games).

At 1998 World championship where Elena led Russia to silver medals she was awarded by MVP (Most Valuable Player) prize and in 2002 World championship (where she also brought Russians to become the vice-champions) Elena Baranova was selected to the World's Top 5 Team.

1991 European Champion as a member of USSR team (the last competition where USSR team took part), Elena led her country to the first Russian Gold medals in basketball at 2003 European Championship, where she also was selected to Europe 'Top 5 Team'.

Achievements
Europe: 22 seasons, over 650 games, over 12,000 points, over 6,000 rebounds

Stroitel Frounze (USSR, 1988–1989), Dynamo Moscow (USSR, 1989–1992), Elitzur Holon (Israel, 1992–1994), CSKA Moscow (Russia, 1994–1999), Bison Mytischi (Russia, 1999), Fenerbahçe Istanbul (Turkey, 1999–2000), Villa Pini Chieti (Italy, 2000–2001), UMMC Ekaterinburg (Russia, 2001–2003), Dynamo Moscow (Russia, 2004–2005), Chevakata Vologda (Russia, 2006–2007), Ros Casares Valencia (Spain, 2007–2008), UMMC Ekaterinburg (Russia, 2008–2009), Nadezhda Orenburg (Russia, 2009–2011), Chevakata Vologda (Russia, 2011–2012).

WNBA: 7 seasons, 220 games (178 started), 2,215 points, 1,403 rebounds

Utah Starzz (1997, 1998, 1999), Miami Sol (2001), New York Liberty (2003, 2004, 2005).

Other achievements
 * 1997 Ronchetti Cup Champion (with CSKA Moscow).
 * 1998 European Player of The Year.
 * In 1999 Baranova played four men's basketball games for Bison Mytischi in the Moscow Oblast championships. She averaged 6.3 points, 6.25 rebounds and 2.75 blocks. By the end of the same 1999 year was selected as 'The Best Russian Basketball Player of 20th century' voted by the most popular Russian newspaper 'Sport-Express' readers.
 * 2003 EuroLeague Women Champion (with UMMC Ekaterinburg) and Final Four MVP.
 * 2010 FIBA Cup Finalist (with Nadezhda Orenburg).
 * 6-times Champion of Russia (the only in Russian Women's Basketball) and Russian Cup winner, 2-times Champion of Israel and Israel Cup winner, Vice-Champion of Turkey and Turkish Cup winner, Champion of Spain and Spanish Cup and SuperCup winner.

WNBA
Source

Regular season

 * style="text-align:left;"| 1997
 * style="text-align:left;"| Utah
 * style="background:#D3D3D3"|28° || 27 || 32.6 || .390 || .377 || .694 || 7.4 || 2.2 || 1.5 || 2.3 || 2.9 || 12.2
 * style="text-align:left;"| 1998
 * style="text-align:left;"| Utah
 * 20 || 19 || 33.6 || .420 || .313 || .831 || 9.3 || 3.5 || 1.1 || 1.5 || 2.8 || 12.9
 * style="text-align:left;"| 1999
 * style="text-align:left;"| Utah
 * 29 || 19 || 19.7 || .405 || .417 || .805 || 3.4 || 1.6 || .7 || .8 || 1.5 || 6.0
 * style="text-align:left;"| 2001
 * style="text-align:left;"| Miami
 * style="background:#D3D3D3"|32° || 30 || 30.8 || .427 || .375 || style="background:#D3D3D3"|.930° || 6.0 || 2.0 || 1.0 || 1.8 || 1.9 || 11.8
 * style="text-align:left;"| 2003
 * style="text-align:left;"| New York
 * 33 || 7 || 25.8 || .416 || .363 || .886 || 5.5 || 1.9 || 1.1 || 1.3 || 1.9 || 8.4
 * style="text-align:left;"| 2004
 * style="text-align:left;"| New York
 * style="background:#D3D3D3"|34° || 33 || 30.8 || .463 || .461 || .925 || 7.2 || 2.0 || 1.1 || 1.7 || 2.4 || 11.6
 * style="text-align:left;"| 2005
 * style="text-align:left;"| New York
 * 33 || 33 || 28.9 || .441 || .388 || .855 || 6.9 || 1.8 || .8 || 1.4 || 1.8 || 8.7
 * style="text-align:left;"| Career
 * style="text-align:left;"| 7 years, 3 teams
 * 209 || 168 || 28.7 || .424 || .391 || .845 || 6.4 || 2.1 || 1.0 || 1.5 || 2.1 || 10.1
 * style="text-align:left;"| 2005
 * style="text-align:left;"| New York
 * 33 || 33 || 28.9 || .441 || .388 || .855 || 6.9 || 1.8 || .8 || 1.4 || 1.8 || 8.7
 * style="text-align:left;"| Career
 * style="text-align:left;"| 7 years, 3 teams
 * 209 || 168 || 28.7 || .424 || .391 || .845 || 6.4 || 2.1 || 1.0 || 1.5 || 2.1 || 10.1
 * style="text-align:left;"| 7 years, 3 teams
 * 209 || 168 || 28.7 || .424 || .391 || .845 || 6.4 || 2.1 || 1.0 || 1.5 || 2.1 || 10.1

Playoffs

 * style="text-align:left;"| 2001
 * style="text-align:left;"| Miami
 * 3 || 3 || 35.0 || .455 || .545 || .727 || 6.0 || 2.3 || .7 || .7 || 3.0 || 14.7
 * style="text-align:left;"| 2004
 * style="text-align:left;"| New York
 * 5 || 5 || 30.8 || .395 || .308 || .800 || 6.8 || 2.0 || .8 || 1.8 || 2.4 || 8.4
 * style="text-align:left;"| 2005
 * style="text-align:left;"| New York
 * 2 || 2 || 29.5 || .300 || .333 || 1.000 || 4.0 || 1.0 || 1.5 || 1.0 || .5 || 4.5
 * style="text-align:left;"| Career
 * style="text-align:left;"| 3 years, 2 teams
 * 10 || 10 || 31.8 || .407 || .407 || .783 || 6.0 || 1.9 || .9 || 1.3 || 2.2 || 9.5
 * style="text-align:left;"| Career
 * style="text-align:left;"| 3 years, 2 teams
 * 10 || 10 || 31.8 || .407 || .407 || .783 || 6.0 || 1.9 || .9 || 1.3 || 2.2 || 9.5
 * 10 || 10 || 31.8 || .407 || .407 || .783 || 6.0 || 1.9 || .9 || 1.3 || 2.2 || 9.5

title: Elena Baranova