Knox makes emotional court appeal

Last year was Amanda Knox convicted for murder of her British roommate Meredith Kercher. At that time was Knox 21 years old. Miss Kercher from Coulsdon was found dead on the 2nd of November 2007 in her bedroom. She stayed in a house in the Umbrian hilltop town that she shared with Knox and others during her year abroad. Her throat had been slit and her semi-naked body was partially covered by a duvet.

Knox who is now 23 years old was convicted for 26 years for the murder of Meredith Kercher who was 21 years old. Knox said that she was an innocent victim of an enormous mistake, namely a sex game that was taken to the extreme. Her Italian ex-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito was also found guilty and sentenced to 25 years.

Knox appealed and during the appeal in Perugia (Italy), she said that she isn’t a dangerous, diabolical, uncaring or violent person like this was described by the prosecution. She burst in to tears when she spoke about Miss Kercher as a dear friend.

Knox's lawyers believe they have new evidence to clear her of murder and will try to introduce a new witness.

The court is expected to rule on these requests at the next hearing on the 18th of December but if Knox's appeal is rejected, she could face a longer sentence behind bars.

I can’t come to an opinion because of the difficulty of the situation. Amanda Knox was very emotional during the 20-minute plea and it looked sincere, but it could also be that she was acting. She says that she had been broken (figurative) by three years behind bars. If the lawyers of Knox can’t bring new evidence or a new witness, then the chance is very small that she will walk free, even smaller than it is already. I have to know more about the case to decide whether she ‘deserves’ 26 years for murder of Meredith Kercher.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/216836/Knox-makes-emotional-court-appeal

Daphné V.E.

Facebook sued by Lamebook

After Facebook suing Teachbook and Placebook, it is now being sued itself by Lamebook.
Lamebook is a website which mocks Facebook about funny comments, photos... people post on the most popular social-network website of the moment. Facebook is being sued about trademark infringment.
It is true that Lamebook has a very similar logo and look. Facebook complained about this and already threatened to sue Lamebook in March but they never did and Lamebook never changed.
Although Lamebook looks a little like Facebook, it doesn't have the same purpose. On Lamebook, you can't start a social network. You can only post funny comments, found on the Facebook website. It is in fact just a parody.
Facebook is afraid that the website is an improper attempt to trade off of Facebook's popularity and fame. In my eyes, this isn't how it goes. I think that when people see Lamebook, they will get curious about Facebook. It is true that Facebook is made fun of and I do understand they don't like this part but I can't see Lamebook as a real threat. I have to admit that some parts of the Facebook website are a little bit ridiculous but it has its good qualities too and everyone who wants to critisize it should have seen this side too in my opinion.
When Facebook sued Placebook, it resolved in Placebook changing its name. It is normal that you can't copy a concept and you can't just copy a layout but Facebook is very well known and I don't think they have to be afraid about competition. Placebook also refers to Facebook but it is more about places then people.
I don't think that Lamebook will win. Facebook was first so I can't see how they are being sued due to trademark infringement. Facebook has gotten very big and is still growing. I don't think Lamebook will cause problems.
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/11/09/strike-lamebook-sues-facebook-trademark-wars/

Mother who killed brain-damaged son loses appeal

In 2008, Frances Inglis, 58 years old from Dagenham (East London), killed her brain-damaged 22-year-old son Tom.

Tom Inglis suffered severe head injuries when he fell out of a moving ambulance in July 2007. He tried to get out of the ambulance because he didn’t want to be taken to hospital after being involved in a minor pub fight.

Tom’s mother gave him a fatal heroin injection to end his ‘living hell’ and she was ordered to serve a minimum of nine years in January for attempted murder. Frances never denied that she gave her son deliberately a fatal overdose in the hospital bed. She lost her appeal against life sentence for murder but her sentence has been reduced to five years.

Inglis’s lawyers argue that the trial judge was wrong by not letting the jury decide whether her defence of provocation was valid. Her son was in constant pain and the only legal way to let hem die was to apply to the high court for an order to withhold food and nutrition. This would result in a slow and painful death and that was certainly not an option for Frances and her son.

Another mother, Kay Gilderale, helped her 31-year-old daughter to kill herself. Just a week after Inglis was sent to jail, Gilderale walked free from court with a 12-month conditional discharge. Frances’s husband and her two sons supported her the whole time and were present at the appeal court hearings.

It is difficult to decide whether or not Frances Inglis should go to jail or not. On one hand, it is certain that she deliberately murdered her son but on the other hand there was a "valid" reason. Her son was living in constant pain and as a mother, you want to do everything to make sure that your child lives in a ‘perfect fairytale’. It is not justified to apply for an order to withhold food and nutrition. A slow an painful death was the only legal way to let him die, but not the most ethical one. I certainly do not say that giving your son a fatal overdose of heroin is ethical!
I would give Frances a 12-month conditional discharge, just like Kay Gilderale.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/12/mother-killed-disabled-son-appeal

Daphné V.E.

$44 million for Mr. Genius Bar

Everyone who hears the word Apple nowadays thinks about the Ipod, Iphone, Imac or the Ipad. Although I remember an apple originally being a sort of fruit.

The last three to four years apple have made an enormous economical progress. Most people who have bought an Apple device are hooked for life to the brand. The marketing technique Apple uses is just pure genius.

When you read that one man is getting a $44 million, you think it is an absurd amount of money. Most of the time I concur when managers, CEO’s, etc. get these kinds of paychecks but in the case of Ron Johnson I thought he even should have had more.

I’ve been to an Apple store myself and I have to admit, I was dazzled. It’s just as the brands products, innovative and pure class. You get to see the product up close in front, feel it and use it. It’s a pleasure to hold a product which has been made to perfection by the Apple designers. Thanks to the concept of Ron Johnson this is possible and Apple have made an enormous profit because of it.

The prices of Apple products are not to say high at least. But because of the Apple store people are actually seduced to buy an Apple product. I’ve been seduced myself and even though sometimes you aren’t happy after you have been seduced. This time I really was.

Steven Vonckers

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/10/30/44-million-for-mr-genius-bar/