Hello everybody, it's Iwa from Bohemian Crafting here again, and today I'm coming to share with you two lab-book notebooks, lab-book books. I created using my own design at collections. One, it's vintage in green, it's this one that was first I created and then I was put myself to some challenge. You know, I'm not using too much those bright colors and especially pink, red I'm using, but pink and purple, I'm not using those colors too much. I don't feel very comfortable with them, I didn't feel very comfortable with them, so I tried to create my own design. It's in this book and it's totally inspired, I even put my nails for that book. It was kind of inspired by my palette garden, because I've got there that there is more red flowers, but also how I feel about perfumes. Lately we spoke with my friend about perfumes. I had in the past my total favorite, it was from Avon and I had that perfume I used on and on for many years. It was incandescent I think or iridescent, something like this. It was a small bowl bottle with gold with gold lid and that smell was that perfume was oh that was really amazing perfume, but then they switched formula and I didn't like it. So I had to switch my perfume and my sister have been using Davido for that cool water for many years and I love that perfume, but it wasn't my sense, it wasn't that I felt that way, but for last year it somehow changed. I think I a little bit grew up, my sister was always more mature, she was more calm and more grow up than I've been ever before, but probably I did grow up a little bit. I am still teenager with many years of experiences, but I swapped to this perfume and I really like that. It smells so fresh, but still calm and it has those small, I don't know how to explain it, it's like a very calm woman with very, very alive blood in vain. I feel that way about this perfume. So I'm using this perfume for now and this was, I know this is in blue, but I feel about perfumes like they are from flowers. Even they are not, even they are using fruit, wood. So I feel about perfume like they are from flowers for that was created this collection, that fuchsia color and this was totally inspired by view of my window, I've got only green color. When I'm sitting in front of that window, let me, let me move my camera here. This is view of from my window, what I see every day. So in that mood was created this collection and I was kind of surprised myself how much I love green color, even I didn't thought about that before. I think about green color, that it's color of life, color of new life, color of nature and I do love nature. If you saw any of my collections, even if is it that little red robin, that Christmas collection or this collection, most of these images are pretty close together because I don't like waste the paper. The paper it's made from threes and I do love threes. I always feel so, but if I do have so many of cuts, that's why I'm trying to use every single piece I do have around me and in that way I've got my collections that they are very close together, that if you will cut those images you will have really just teeny mini small pieces of cuts. You will don't waste your paper because I will feel so bad. I will cry for those threes. Even when I've been small, my dad was, I'm gonna show you what is inside. I will don't explain, this is a Pemera, this is Taki, you will see that, right? So I will talk. That's what I do, I do love talking. So when I've been small, my dad was like volunteer, those men who look after forest, those hunters, but they wasn't hunting all the time. There was hunting season when they was allowed to hunt, some not separated, like chosed animals which was too much in that forest, but all the rest of the year they look after forest, look after animals in that forest, they feed them, they clean, fallen down trees and we've been helping so much, I love that time. We always went to, I love to go to forest with my dad at winter. It was so many snow in there, I am from Czech Republic where normally when I've been small was winter very hard. We've been living under mountains so there was always lots of snow and I remember that sometimes I went behind my daddy and then I dropped myself or I felt myself through to that snow so only maybe heart was seeing from my head, not me at all, so that had to dig in into that snow to take me out from that snow many times, but I love that time when we went to that forest and we went to help the animals, we went to feed them, to bring them nuts or dry grass, you know, all that food what they eat and I remember one day we were really very small with my sister and one day we went to that forest close to our home and there was like noisy and or that he shouted on us, hey girls come on climb to the tree fast and we didn't know why, but we did, we always did climb, love to climb on the trees and that was fast right behind us because there was how to say I know only pig you know that animal pig which is which is not growing which you have for a meal but in the forest they are very fluffy those wild pigs I'm not sure if is it that right word and they can be dangerous especially if they are oh my English now will sound very terrible if they are ladies do pigs fluffy pigs I have to say that but where they are mommy like where they've got their babies they are very dangerous really they can kill you because they feel that they have to protect their babies which what we did all I can be that way as well if I do protect my babies so we had to climb on the trees and I remember I lost my doll we always bring my dolls everywhere and I lost my doll and that that wild pig she grabbed that doll and I start to cry and she was right under that tree and because I was crying she didn't want to leave and all that was on that opposite tree and he was shouting on me like oh please don't cry don't cry she will never leave so I tried to call myself and my sister because she was always that calm person so she tried to call me down she tried to tell me that oh I'm gonna buy you new one new doll and I told her that no she she was you know my my dolls had always names and she was pee pee I remember that name it was at the time when we was watching at the telly there was a series not check series it was I think Norway from Norway about a girl her name was pee pee she was ginger ginger hairs and her her hair was in those ponytail but the way around the head like up around the head she was so funny she was riding white horse and her dad was pirate I think if I remember that right and that series was amazing so one of my dolls she had ginger ginger hairs and I remember I called her pee pee and that pee pee fell down and that wild pig she was picking up and she destroyed my pee pee but I remember that time when we went with all that to the forest to help those animals that was so much to joy that was so many you know adventures we built up in the summer we built up like small small cities from the branches falling down from the trees around the trees like small fences and small houses that was so amazing and my dad always told us how to build those things how to make a whistle is it the right word for from the branch you will put a piece you will make a horse through to that and you can play on that on that I'm not sure if is it whistle but he told us this one as well so it was amazing time so all this even it was it was inspired by my view from my window all this brings so many memories really so many memories and I remember I'm back in with that mushroom collection every year every single year many times in the summer we went to go to forest to find the mushrooms because they are very tasty if you know which kind of you can pick up they are very tasty and they are amazing and my grandma she always went to to the forest for herbles she was a really good one in herbles she knew so much things about herbles my dad is mom she was amazing so all those memories they are you know they when I created this one that was like go go in the past go through the past and and remember and in that forest where we went to help to animals and where we went to help to our dad to look after those animals and look after those trees there was also like a camp uh oops this way children's camp and that it's like a game in my country when you've got somewhere it's like pioneer camp right it was at the past and I'm not sure if pioneers are still there I don't think that pioneers are still there there are scouts now but it was the time when was pioneers and in that forest was one pioneer camp and every summer there was children camping and I remember we village kids we did we did those missions through the night only kids and that was a safe time where when you like a kid can go out even through the night because there wasn't any creepy people who can kill you now it's so weird because there is so many dangerous things but when I've been small that was like safe place you know we we we was able to go about midnight to go to that forest and we oh sorry we had we had pretty good time no one was scared scared like someone will kill us or so and we we made every single summer we made missions like we village kids we made missions to steal a flag from from those camps it was pretty good really that was so amazing so exciting and I remembered even those kids they did in those camps they did enjoy it because they knew that we will come in one one night so they had to watch the flag of that pioneer camp they had to watch that they they had a night garden gardens night guards not gardens I can't see green so I'm thinking about garden but they had night guards who supposed to watch all camp and also that camp flag and we did impossible things to steal that it was so amazing that's why all of us all our kids family we knew how to climb the threes we knew how to how to say that you know when a snake walks he doesn't walk you know but when when he moves on the floor on the ground he moves like this so we copy that you know to be don't see to be like hide in in the grass I don't know how to say that what snakes do how is that right word I don't remember I don't even never look for that because I never need to know how is that right word when snake walk or move not walk when snake move he does that laying down on the ground and moving who so we did this one to to get to that to that pile a little bit that flag I don't think I've got something here but here I've got another those images and it was really amazing it was so exciting and we always celebrated when we've been successful when we wasn't successful we tried that next night again and again sometimes when it was after lane and we tried to do that snakes snakes on on the ground and we came home really dirty from from everything we went through I remember my mom was wow that was very painful that was very painful that was not too good we've been punished so hard you know or when we when we spent too long time in that forest and we came after midnight uh even my dad he was very very mad on us so he was like never again goes so but that time was so exciting really that was that was proper childhood when I see those kids now sometimes I feel so sorry for them because they don't have this excitement anymore I think there is too much dangerous time too many weird people I don't know I think those kids are missing so much really doing missions was totally amazing so when I created especially this one that was bring me so much joy I don't have anything here okay and all that green I see through that window every single summer especially when I leave if you notice I've got around my window that EV leaves all my wall around the window it's covered with that EV leaves and I love that but I can't leave it there because it will ruin the house so I will have to take it off I do it every year but more and more I'm not taking time to do it to keep that greenery around for a little bit longer time because I do love nature I do so all this creation it's like go in the past and this is magnetic here is magnet and here is magnet so I'm going through to that lab walk as you can see it has many openings it has so much stuff and most of them are my design and those small tax and tickets they are actually off cuts from all that rest so I spent I tried to spend everything I had really so it has many pockets many openings not too hard openings because this supposed to be very understandable setup of book that was tutorial for my patreon so if you would like to do book like this don't don't be afraid to go to that patreon page because you can sign up just for one month pick up all kind of tutorials I've got already there or pick up all kind of images I got already there download it to your computer and then sign off there I you know I'm not gonna force you to stay there I will appreciate every single one I hope my patreons know that how much I love them how much I appreciate them they are very patient with me they are really they are amazing they they they are very patient I adore them so much so this was one of tutorials I tried I tried to do on my patreon page and I always do appreciate every your support here on youtube all messages I get I know I am very terrible with answering all those messages I do take it's taking time for me but it's sometimes you know I never used a book I forgot something okay I never used a book for learning English maybe it's wrong I guess it that's wrong but I mostly learn from from my colleagues at work what they are saying I tried to like find find what that mean like guessing and maybe it's wrong that I never used a book because then that writing takes a time for me it was like when I had that video which perforated envelope if you saw that video with that vintage perforated video with that vintage perforated envelope there was mining mining was that right word and I said meaning because for me it was m oh that was somehow different say not probably mining and was m a no mi mi and I when I see this for me it's like logical that both I will say same but English language it's so hard because exactly for this one even you've got a mi and I writing down you are saying that first I a little bit different way even if it's the same number same letter you know what I mean you've got different pronunciation of letters even they are wrote exactly like you know same way it's hard to explain and I just found that this key fell down from something I will have to find where so this collection was totally inspired all those perfumes because I think about perfumes that way that they are colorful some of them they are very heavy some of them they are very soft but most of them they used flowers or a sense of flowers so this was pretty inspired by perfumes and for a long time I wasn't sure about this collection but more and more I'm looking on that collection I think I'm turning finally to proper woman back again my son doesn't need tough woman around them anymore they are old enough to look after themself so I guess I don't have to be that tough mom anymore who will be not ill because kids need her who will have all the time why is falling down aha look I know I will have to use another jump rings jump jump rings these are not too strong so I will have to fit those two charms again you know I don't have to be again anymore that tough woman who can survive anything and everything because my sons are already grown men they can look after themself so I can start to be woman proper woman with all kind of even if I am ill I am just ill I'm human only but when you are single mom you just can't do this you can't to be ill you know because kids needs you and who will look after kids if you will be ill right you can't cry because then kids will feel not safe they will feel something happening so you can't cry so many times people around me was thinking oh she's too tough I am in a some some point of life I am maybe tougher than other ladies but it's just because hard hard life tut me that way two things which was happened to me sometimes they was my mistake my wrong choices but the life just tut me to be tough and to be hard so I'm not always sweet don't don't think about me that way I'm not always sweet if something it's not good to me it's something try to be bad to me fake wrong I am turning to bad person it's not bad like I will do something about but I'm not letting people to deal with me really by the way like I will be just shut up no no if someone it's not fair to me if someone try to use my good will someone try to use me for their own profit and they just think that I can't be used I'm not I'm not allowing people to do that it's just too bad because I don't do that to people you know so yeah and probably that's why people thought about me that I am tough woman but I don't think about myself that way I think I am soft woman even I had to hide it for many years I had to hide it that I am soft woman I had to be stronger than I actually was I had to be stronger for my boys for to make them safe to make them feel safe that nothing will happen you know it have to be done for kids if you are a single parent no matter what if you are single dad you have to be sometimes softer than men can be you're like man like a manly audience you know what I mean not men like a human but men like you know that opposite of female they have to be softer sometimes even they don't want to be but if they they are single parents they have to show that mom inside of them for their kids you know so that that was same with me sometimes I had to show that even it's not good I have to be that stronger person here now I have to I have to teach my son how to use hammer that wasn't a never problem for me because my dad took me this one where I was very young he told us how to um could could is it right how to could freeze using ace using uh so is it right so that electric so any any kind of tool so I've been pretty good with any kind of tool science I've been small everything falling down oops so you can just have a look I'm gonna find that ticket so to teach my boys how to use hammer or ace or so that wasn't bad but to learn myself how to be not like mommy not like oh my babies if you know what I mean that was always so hard for me really really that was very very hard for me to learn myself how to bring a little bit of manly thinking manly logic to my family when my sons was grow up mostly with just with me and I can say that I didn't I wasn't being too successful with that because to be tough like men it's not easy they do think totally different way they do think about things about about time in life totally different way and to try to copy that I can't I can't you know I can't they think oh if he will hurt himself that's his his fault but me like a mom I'm thinking he can't hurt himself I have to help him you know I have to protect him and to try to find some compromise of this one of this confusion that was always so hard so what do you see here they are mostly my design those or photographs they are definitely not my design and I'm mumbling about everything I think I start to talk about that journal again yeah as you can see it has so much flower design so much pink and like fuchsia colors so many butterflies very soft butterflies and I can say more and more I'm looking on this collection maybe I finally feel like a woman I think I need it you think I need to put some softness to my life yeah I'm gonna show you this way something more like I'm expecting to open doors from a man because he is gentleman you know I never expected that before but I think it's right because me as a woman I will be soft and he like a man he will be that tough right that's the change of that very very interesting book that the secret I know that book is not writing about this one but I took it from there you know it's about expression how you will feel about that what you will take from books not what you will that you will have to follow those books and I think I already put that video with the part when I am talking about this one when I'm reading books any any kind of books it doesn't mean that I will follow them unless it's math mathematical book or instruction how to put together wardrobe right that is very helpful to follow step by step everything what it's write down but the rest it's about applying to your life not about following every single step you have to apply something what you will choose you like you have to apply it to your life do not follow step by step and I think this video it's already too long so I'm going faster so as you can see it has many openings many pockets it has really many images I'm going faster I'm not going to talk anymore who I've been today on coffee with my best friend and I already talked three hours of women talk because we needed both and we talk mostly about men that's so strange that we always end up with we start about kids then we go shopping then we go on coffee then we talk about you know some women talk and we always always ending talking about men I'm not sure if if men's has same same problem that they do talk about women all the time I am really not sure I have to ask my boys what they do talk about he's got writing section and as you can see I used also that very soft design on those papers those journaling papers and they do have bullet bullet journal papers I made them myself it's designed like this with that bullet bullet journal that dip dip dip dot dot dot so it has those tickets again I'm going to be a little bit faster because I'm talking too much and you can't see you can but I think it's just too much to listen and me mumbling I will appreciate if you will let me know what kind of perfume you like maybe I will choose some you know some some new one I'm not sure but I really like all those I don't like those very heavy perfumes not those deep heavy perfumes I don't like them for me it's no wood they they make me choke is that right for choke but I do like all those fresh perfumes I do like perfumes with cedar cedar wood I do love perfumes with fuchsia fuchsia smell but I don't know which perfume has fuchsia I will have to google it because I love fuchsia flowers they are gorgeous flowers with beautiful smell so if you will let me know what perfume you like I will appreciate that really I think it's it's always good to know some good good perfumes because we always use them so I will appreciate some good advices what perfume is good for you what perfume do you use if you used any like my mom she has I think three different perfumes one she used for every day another one she used when she's going to the cinema or or theater you know it's a little bit heavier and another perfume she has when she's sad she's got a special perfume when she feels sad because she always thinks that perfume makes her happy so I told her a few times I know one time I tried that one just one time and she's got a really good explanation so I stopped asking because she was like aha I do understand now I ask her why she doesn't use that perfume all the time you know that will be make you happy so you will be happy every day she told me yeah if I will use it every day that happy feeling will go away and I will don't feel happy anymore with that perfume that's why I'm saving it when I feel sad I'm going to use that perfume because I know it will work and I I think it's very logical if you've got something if you are happy all the time if you don't have any struggle in your life you will don't feel that way you will don't appreciate that happy time right so I do understand because you will don't see that that you are actually happy you will don't have that hard time which will show you now it's that hard time so when you will be happy you will feel that way if you will be without any problems all the time so you can't imagine you can actually feel happy you know you can't appreciate that that it's now happy time enjoy it because then they will be tough days I'm so wondering where I will have talks no problemy days because I do have always all the time I do have some issues it's like I'm calling them it's like now now Evie you have to enjoy it so here this and this and we are on the end yay with my talking and talking so these are my Tula books using my own design papers if you like those papers they are on my Etsy I will put link down below to give you you know quick quick direction where to find those papers if you like them if you like those love books you can find the tutorial on my patreon and you don't have to be scared to go there you can sign up just for one month to pick up this tutorial or all those tutorials I've got there and it has also pocket here it's empty and this one has pocket here as well and I guess here yeah here I've got many other here I've got that rest I totally forgot here I've got the test so you can pick up just tutorials or you can pick up all those images I've got there all those epimeras all those collections I shared there already and just you know signed signed out it's no pressure no pressure on you at all so and here I just copy the papers oh oh my this video is very very long I'm going to fix those two two oh but they are those two embellishments those two charms but they fall down I'm going to use some different different rings those those rings because they are not strong enough to hold on those cards so this is my sharing for today I hope you enjoyed to watch all those openings all those pictures and epimeras thank you so much for all your amazing comments thank you so much for all your amazing support I hope you know how much I appreciate that how wonderful day I always have when you're leaving those amazing comments to me and if you would like to see something please leave me comment what you would like to see and I will try to do my best to bring video with anything you would like to see thank you so much for spending your time with me today take care about yourself and see you next time bye


Global air travel has increased tremendously in the last decade with easier domestic and intercontinental travel. According to the World Bank, around 4 billion passengers globally traveled through airplanes. How does the aviation industry significantly contribute to air pollution, directly and indirectly? Activities like the construction of airports, taxiing, landings and take-offs, constant vehicular activities caused by taxis, buses, and private vehicles, etc. contribute to the air pollution. Fugitive dust emissions are caused due to dust storms or long-distance dust dispersions. Severely deteriorated air quality reduces visibility, causes various pulmonary diseases and affects the physical and mental health of the nearby citizens. The most common pollutants are carbon monoxide, unburnt hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and secondary pollutants such as ground-level ozone and smog. A network of ambient air monitoring devices such as Oizom's Pelludrone is deployed at the runways and periphery of the airport to continuously monitor the concerned pollutants. Warnings can be issued through display screens and mobile alerts about poor air quality. Visibility monitoring through particulate monitoring integrated with weather data, measured by Oizom's weather commensures safer landings and take-offs. The airport is turned into a, smart and efficient airport, through automated indoor air ventilation, automated dust suppressors, road surface conditions, etc. Airport air quality monitoring for smart airports leads to a sustainable pollution-free future. To read in detail about how effective the solution is, click on the link in the description below.


Russian colonel supplied wrong radars to protect Crimean Bridge. Colonel Sergei Volkov, the head of the Russian Guards' Maritime Department, was given a six-year prison sentence by a military court in Russia for using inadequate radars to shield the invaders' Crimean Bridge from Ukrainian drone attacks. Media Zona, a Russian outlet, reported this. Volkov faced serious repercussions after being found guilty of abusing his position of authority. The news of his arrest and detention spread by the end of March 2023. The publication claimed that the National Guard and the Rostov-on-Don Research Institute of Radio Communications have signed a 395.5 million rubles contract for the supply of two radar systems to counter UAVs, which could be used, among other things, to defend the Crimean Bridge. Volkov pleaded not guilty. According to investigators, Volkov implemented systems that, as it turned out, during the execution of the contract, did not allow for successful completion of missions to combat unmanned vehicles. During the verdict, the judge clarified that the system that Volkov bought had been serviceable but not suitable for protection from drones. Media Zona said.


Before we start, how much time do I have so I don't abuse my privilege here. Oh, how much time you need. Let's just say I'll try not to abuse the privilege. How about about 10 minutes. That's fine. That's fine. I have senators for those of you who don't know me. My name is Bradley Myers and I live in Paula. I recently retired after practicing law in Manchester for 38 years. Largely criminal defense and some plaintiffs personal injury. During that time I handled about four to six police misconduct cases, two of which went to trial. One of which was a plaintiff's verdict and the other was a home jury. Now, qualified immunity for some reason and this was going back maybe 30 years was not an issue in any of those cases. I don't remember why, but it certainly is an issue now. And I would like to start by kind of going maybe a 30,000 feet view of things. Why is this bill being proposed? Why abolish qualified immunity? You're the Senate Judiciary Committee. Your focus presumably is to create just laws based on sound policies to benefit the greatest number of individuals and not to favor a protected class or group of persons. Abolishing qualified immunity would accomplish that very goal of benefiting the greatest number of persons. It's very simple. The bill creates meaningful accountability for a taxpayer funded arm of government. That exerts enormous power and control over the citizen. What is not create abolishing abolishing qualified community would not create what is known as strict liability. In other words, you just present your case, and you've established liability with putting in a minimum amount of facts. It simply removes the unjust judicially created doctrine that shields police from the consequences of their own wrongdoing. Now, I'm going to speak to a lot of the objections that I've heard from opponents of the bill and the benefit of going last year is that going through my notes of what folks had to say last week's hearing. We heard a lot of alarmist alarmists from the law enforcement community telling us that abolishing qualified immunity will open the floodgates to frivolous lawsuits. And since I've done plaintiffs work. I can tell you and we've heard that for years from insurance companies when this committee and the legislature as a whole past laws to broaden claimants rights, or to remove unjust defenses, such as the seat belt defense. The lawsuit is simply a bad cliche that is being used in this bill to take away rights of claimants to seek compensation for the courts. There is no evidence beyond any speculations not evidence. It hasn't happened in Colorado, which is which has had qualified immunity for a year abolish qualified immunity a year ago. There is no evidence that abolishing qualified immunity would somehow use another cliche open the floodgates to a wave of frivolous lawsuits against the police. The statute is worded in such a way that it limits frivolous lawsuits, because it adopts what's called the English rule, which is that the loser pays. It's if the court and this I'm referring to subsection D judgments ever entered favor defendant the court may award reasonable attorney's fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred to the defendant for defending any claims, the court deems frivolous. So, that is a significant check on against the fear that abolishing qualified immunity would open the floodgates to frivolous lawsuits. I'm not wild about this portion of the bill. I understand that there's a reason for it being in there. There are very, very few statutes in Vermont, which incorporate the English rule that the loser pays, but I'm comforted by the fact that the court has the discretion to determine whether a lawsuit is frivolous a lawsuit against police or department or both is frivolous or not. So I think that's a significant check against the possibility of an excessive number of lawsuits. I should also say from my own perspective of handling these cases, and also doing personal injury work. Police are hard enough to win, even if there is no qualifying. It's tantamount to suing a physician in a medical malpractice case. Why, well in part because the public, they favor the police. Okay, police officers were taught from, you know, from childhood that they are trustworthy and deserve our respect. And that is with doctors. So in front of a jury, a police officer is going to have that built in respect. And that will be a check, I think on the against the success of a potential lawsuit. There is no evidence that abolishing qualified immunity would jeopardize public safety. What would happen in Colorado, or Connecticut, which is abolished qualified immunity, nor New Mexico. The civil justice system should be balanced between the claimant and the defendant in this case the police or police department police brutality cases. In police brutality cases that balance. If you have qualified immunity is fictitious police and police departments who employ them have a huge unfair advantage in litigation because of qualified to the detriment of the victim and their families. It's wrong. It's morally wrong. It's legally wrong, and abolishing qualified immunity and adopting S 254 would eliminate that if someone is injured, due to someone else do the negligence of another. The wrong doer is held accountable through the civil justice system. If a doctor makes a mistake, the doctor can be sued and held accountable by a jury. It's hard to do. But if the injury is aggravated enough, and there's liability the doctor will be held accountable. Why should it be any different when an officer harms a citizen, whether physically through brutality or a violation of constitutional rights by illegally stopping someone illegally searching them. As in the Zulu case which I'm sure you're familiar with, seizing the car and then forcing the person just leaving them on their own. There is a screening process that lawyers engage in, in evaluating whether to take a case on a contingent fee, which is how most lawyers would take. Policeman's conduct cases. Unbelievable. Am I willing to do I feel that the case is strong enough to invest in at least one expert for example a police misconduct expert former police officer. Am I willing to risk the possibility of a verdict for the defendant. If this bill were to be passed and you've got the loser pays provision. All of those factors make these types of cases. Very very difficult to litigate and to win. Qualified immunity abolishing qualified immunity will encourage lawyers to represent citizens harmed by the police, whether physically, or by egregious constant egregious violation of Vermont, or United States constitutional rights, and it will provide justice by allowing policemen conduct cases to be heard by juries, which is something that David slay pointed out, rather than dying in the crib. So to speak, of being unfairly dismissed before trial by a judge, without any discovery to find out the merits of the case. I think it's also going to increase trust in government and the police, because egregious behavior by the police and by the departments, employing them will be there will be held to account.  No, I'm okay. I'm in a bit of pain, Brad from some. I'm sorry. No, no, it's fine. It's not your fault. I don't think there's any sign from that. Yeah. There are attorneys, there's an attorney's fees provision for the successful claimant in the bill, which I think is a very good thing. It's not a novel approach because of course, under the federal civil rights statute 42 United States code section 1983. There is a an attorney's fees component. It's not automatic. The judge has to find that their substantial merit to the lawsuit, or that you substantially succeeded. You have to have an expert justify the attorney's fees and expenses.  I went through that in a successful case that I had, and Judge Billings, who was the federal judge at the time, did cut down some of my attorney's fees and expenses. So it's not an automatic ticket to get your attorney's fees and expenses, even if you win. And this under under Vermont law, there are attorneys fees awarded in other cases, where Senate judiciary and the legislature as a whole, found it a positive social benefit to encourage the filing of lawsuits, in particular, I'm thinking of the construction statute, because otherwise attorneys wouldn't be willing to help homeowners and take those cases on a contingency basis. Now we heard from Sheriff Mark who and others that abolishing qualified immunity is going to discourage qualified applicants for police positions because they're, they're afraid of being sued. That's a fiction. There is no correlation that's been demonstrated at all between the difficulty in filling police openings currently and abolishing qualified immunity. Manchester recently had three officers leave, and just as quickly they rehire or they rehired, they hired two new officers to fill those positions. If an officer doesn't want to continue in law enforcement, because he or she is afraid of being sued. Then, or being held accountable for their actions. Is this somebody that we really want carrying a badge and a gun and driving a patrol car. I guess, taking that argument by the police that it's abolishing qualified immunity would discourage retention of police officers or hiring of police officers. That's really kind of code for saying, well, we should be allowed to relax the standards for hiring police officers. And there is this, there is an issue in Vermont about police departments hiring rejects from other departments was recently in Woodstock, an officer who was fired by another department was hired by Woodstock. It's happened in Rutland, it's happened in Ludlow, and it's happened in Woodstock. Senator White talked about raising concerns at the last hearing about insurance issues and indemnification. And this, this gets into a kind of a broad issue of, well, who's going to bear the loss. Under current law, qualified immunity, since it basically bars citizens from the courthouse door, seeking redress against the police, especially the poor and people of color who were most often victimized by the police misconduct. It takes away the remedy for the harms that they've suffered. Stephen Gillum from the Wyndham County NAACP. He asked you last week, what about the people. He mentioned about how people having bad experiences with police officers suffer post traumatic stress disorder, among other harms, which also affects the also affects their families and society at large. I believe that this bill will help those harmed by police misconduct who seek compensation for their injuries. And I'm specifically referring to, by taking away qualified immunity. I'm speaking of the indemnification clause in sections E and F. All police are insured. When I tried my first case. Actually, it's my first civil case was a civil rights case against city of Rutland and two officers. The jury returned a verdict against the officers and the city. And they also returned a verdict for punitive damages against the officers. Well, those damages were paid, either by the city or by the insurance company. So having insurance coverage, and this goes to the issue of well, if is it an intentional tort, will there be insurance coverage. There aren't going to be officers losing their homes. If they are held accountable by a jury for for what they did to a citizen. The indemnification provisions of sections E and F. Shift the loss for police misconduct to the municipalities and to their insurers. That's what insurance is for. The permits involving the officers involved suffer the loss also. Those are in those entities are better able to handle the losses than the victim. Could we wrap up Brad? Yes. Yeah, thank you. This is a victim's rights bill, I think above all. Bill and your colleagues in the house have spent much time and effort passing legislation to protect victims. This is a victim's right bill you're protecting victims of police misconduct by giving them the key to the courthouse. It's not an automatic jury verdict for the plaintiff. You are simply helping them achieve justice and accountability for the police. And I think it's a, I give you, Senator Sears, tremendous credit, Senator Baruch and Senator Ram Hinsdale for sponsoring this bill. I am sorry that you are taking such such heat from the law enforcement community. That's wrong. But this bill is is eminently reasonable. And I appreciate your interest in having me testify. Brad, I want to mention Senator Ballant was also is also a sponsor of the bill. Yes. I get you know you've raised the specter of the frivolous lawsuit and I think that's something we all are concerned with as an attorney or as a retired attorney now. Would you take a case. If, you know, unless you were darn sure you could win.  Well, number criteria. Number one, there have to be good facts. Okay. Are there witnesses photographs injuries. Number two, what's the client like. Do they have a record, because of course the Defense Council is going to tear them apart. Can they withstand cross examination. How would they appear in front of the jury. Number three, what experts am I going to need. Where am I going to find them. How much they're going to cost to establish liability on the part of the police. And of course, if there's an injury I need to have medical experts coming. So all of those factor into the equation of whether or not the case is worth taking. Does that answer your question. So really, we've talked about the frivolous lawsuit and how to avoid them. We haven't talked about the requirement in the, in the section that outlines the loser pays. If I had a good enough case, I'd be willing to take it, not withstanding loser pace. I think that will discourage some. Someone who's not familiar with police misconduct cases from taking a case, but even though I'm not thrilled about it. I understand why it's in the bill. It's a counterbalance to the attorney's fees and costs being awarded to the party that substantially prevails. Again, it's not automatic. It's got to be screened by a pledge. No, either way. Thank you for your question for Brad Senator White. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Morrison. I do disagree with you on a couple points and then I have a couple of questions but I disagree with you that this is the only way to hold police accountable and I think there's a lot of efforts going on right now in around, around the criminal justice council and their professional regulations committee to hold police accountable. So I do disagree with you on that and I'm not so sure that the right now in this environment that the public actually favors the police. So I just, I'm not asking a question about that. I'm just saying that I disagree with you on those two things, but I will, I do have a couple questions. One, I, I, and I'm not an attorney. So, and I'm just really trying to figure this out. I'm, I'm not, I'm really trying to figure this out and make sure we do the right thing. So, and I understand that what was told to us in Iqbal that that case that qualified immunity prevented the discovery from happening but my understanding is that that case had nothing to do with qualified immunity and had to do with the federal pleading that it wasn't didn't qualified immunity didn't even figure into that so I'm a little surprised that that was used as an example and my two and then Colorado only does constitutional violations, this bill expands it to any statutory or common law violations also. So they aren't comparable at all. And this is much more expansive than Colorado. And my question is the I, I've read a ton of stuff on this and I've read the Zulu case. And I also read the Zulu case. And if you Google Zulu. The first thing that comes up or one of the first things that comes up is the summary explanation that was given to us by one of our legislative counsel attorneys, and then in reading that and in reading the case, the way I understand this is that, and I know there's a difference of opinion here but the way I understand this is that Zulu did. The court did create a right of action and a right to sue. So I'm a little confused because when I asked before if, if there was a different standard that we could use and if the if we didn't people didn't already have the right of action, the right to sue. That's what I thought Zulu did. And I, I know there's a difference of opinion but that was the information given to us by our legislative counsel, not not been, but in a, at a different time on a different case, or a different issue. So I confused, did it or does it or does it not create a right of action. Yeah, well Zulu created a cause of action for violation of citizens rights under the Vermont Constitution, right, right on what what I have dealt with. It has been where there's injury. You know, common law torts said, you know injury false imprisonment. For example, Zulu only created that right as pertaining to harms suffered for violation of the Vermont Constitution. Right. And that's why but and we keep comparing this saying that it's comparable to Colorado, because Colorado. They haven't seen any increase in suits and they haven't seen police officers abandoning ship. And that's what Zulu does here. That's what Zulu already does in Vermont and in Colorado it is limited to constitutional violations. So I don't, I don't understand what you're saying that Colorado is not an apt comparison for yes because it only it only addresses violations under the Colorado Constitution. That's, you know, that's a fair point. We're seizing on Colorado is the bright shiny object because you know they abolish qualified immunity and they've done that that's been in place the longest. I think Connecticut and New Mexico were more recent. You could always sue in Vermont, you could always sue a police officer for you know for violation of federal constitutional rights and for and for our common law torts. It's just that Zulu. Well, maybe I'm wondering off track here. I'm pressing your question. Well, my question is kind of two fold I guess we compare it to Colorado and say, we have not seen a lot of suits and we have not seen negative impacts from Colorado's kind of qualified immunity. Colorado eliminated it for constitutional violations, not statutory and common law, just constitutional violations. So, comparing it to out this bill doesn't make any sense to me because this is a much broader bill. And my understanding is that Zulu created a right to action. There are violations of the Vermont Constitution. So if that's already in effect. Then I don't understand what I don't understand why qualified immunity stands in the way of filing a suit against a police officer for for a violation of the Vermont Constitution. Well, because of violation of you have to show a violation of a clearly established right. Yeah, but and I think that the misinterpretation of clearly established right is that that is a rule that has been stretched to the breaking point to shield police. And I'm, I don't mean to belabor this but when I read there is a 2015 case that says a clearly established right is one that is sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right. I can say that it has to be the exactly the same it says that a reasonable official would understand and that that to me says that the way it's being interpreted by people not necessarily in Vermont and not necessarily in the second circuit court. That they that they're misinterpreting what a clearly established right is. What is the standard we should use. I think you've asked some great questions, and I'm not sure this witness, Brad was here. I'm not sure he's an expert on this. Well, let me try to answer. If you'll have if you'll have it. I would defer to them. Go ahead.  Look, I. Sure. I just write on. I've read. I mean, the example that sticks in my mind of the abuse of the. The standard is that a case involving a prison corrections official not in Vermont, who maced a prisoner, a defenseless prisoner causing harm that lawsuit was dismissed, because it was not of the same. Not same conduct as the case on which it was a presidential case, which was where a prison, a corrections officer punched a defenseless inmate. And the court said, and I don't remember the name of the case court said, you know, we're sorry, but that's the standard. And this is this is being applied all over the country to the people. I understand that but I, that was not in Vermont and it wasn't in the second second circuit. And it was a corrections officer. It wasn't a law enforcement officer. So if we're really serious about quality. About eliminating qualified immunity for constant violation of constitutional rights. Why don't we apply it to everybody including us, and I know. Meeting the legislature, including the legislature. I remember that discussion. Last week, you have absolute immunity. Prosecutors have absolute immunity. Judges have absolute immunity. That's not an issue. You can say anything. I know. That's what I'm saying. Why, why would we why not just eliminate immunity. Well, here's, here's, here's why police carry a tremendous amount of authority. You might not be in office. You know, next, next November. That's probably true. You might be voted out of office. I hope not but you know, police interact on a daily basis with citizens. They carry guns and badges and tremendous authority. And unfortunately, there are officers who abuse that authority and harm citizens. Okay, qualified immunity is the number one roadblock to holding these officers accountable. Their interactions with the public are different than a legislator or a judge or a prosecutor. It's a different level of involvement. And it's a legal check on. Abolition qualified immunity with further the legal checks on their conduct. I do awkward analogy, but I do understand that, but I just am most of the examples that are given. Don't aren't in Vermont and they're not even in the second circuit. So I'm just, and I so I realize that but anyway, those are just my concerns. What, what, what can I say to address those. Well, you can give me real examples I guess of where it's been unduly used in Vermont and the second circuit. I'm wondering if I would like to hear what Jay and yeah, I'm sorry. No, I, I, these, these are questions that need to be answered. Those going to compelling but I feel like we're basically, you know, an extended one on one rather than I know. Yeah, sorry. I'll just finish by saying, I don't have the answers for it. As far as Vermont or the second circuit. But J. J DS J's letter points out for Vermont cases. The letter of one 20. I believe they're Vermont cases. Keen versus Snyder. Kent versus cats. When field versus trottier. That door for cases but I only see three years. Jay, do you want to. Are you are you available. Please thank you. Good morning all. Happy to answer any questions again for the record. Yeah, the question basically is, what about Vermont cases. Yes, so Senator Sears, as you just referenced, we noted three cases that went up to the second circuit. Specifically, that were Vermont based cases where qualified immunity resulted in the, despite there being divided the court agreeing that there was a rights violation. The second circuit found qualified immunity applied and so the plaintiffs lost based on qualified immunity. In one of those cases the plaintiffs, due to their loss on qualified immunity actually had to pay the defendants, or was ordered to pay the the defendants costs so it can have pretty serious harms to plaintiffs even when the court acknowledges and agrees that their rights were violated. Keen versus Snyder was Mr Keen was questioned in his living room about a possible DUI troopers decided to arrest him on suspicion of DUI.  The district court denied qualified immunity. The second circuit reverse granting qualified immunity, because the troopers action did not violate clearly established law, without deciding whether the force was excessive. That's one that struck me as particularly egregious that he, even a state attorney declined to prosecute, yet the person was punched pepper sprayed and so forth.  And even though the district court denied qualified immunity the second circuit reversed it. That is a Vermont case my correct. Yes that's correct. I think there was a there was two Vermont State troopers I, and I think what this gets to is that there are serious violations of people's constitutional rights, federal and state, as well as their other civil rights sex and what we find is that in some of those cases not all, but in some of those cases, if there's not clearly established law, the court is is compelled by its prior rulings and precedent around qualified immunity to say, you know the officer is not going to be be held liable here, even though we agree they violated the person's rights use excessive force, etc. You know violated their civil rights, discriminated against them, any of those kinds of things. The court could say yes, that's true. But, because of our doctrine of qualified unity which the legislature has yet to say anything about, you're going to protect this officer from liability or you know that they're their employer really from liability. And that's what this bill is about it's about removing that that hurdle that that that prevents people from accessing justice. When their rights are violated, when their rights are not violated. If there is no excessive force if there is no violation of their free speech rights or for their equal protection rights, then there's no case, then the case is over. This bill only support victims of recognized rights violations and ensure that they get some measure of justice. I just want to speak a little Senator white believes that Zulu created. What's your impression of that you heard her questions. Yes, I'll be happy to talk about Zulu, I was the cell you represented Mr Zulu. As I think you know we, you know I was my colleague and I Lee Ernst and I represented Greg. You know, it's a sort of five year case, all the way up to the Supreme Court and what the decision says to me, it related to this bill is one it says. Yes, it gives people the right under the Constitution to sue for constitutional violations. You don't need to worry about the proclaims acting I won't go into all that. The bigger, I think in the confusion is around two things one Zulu is unclear at best on the point of whether it's holding around whether plaintiffs can get a damaged remedy whether victims can get justice, essentially, whether that applies to the state only or to the state and municipal employees so that's left unclear.  The second part and more importantly, is that what the court laid out as the test for whether victims of rights violations could get justice could get damages was based on qualified immunity. It's not the same, but it's a qualified as this court said a qualified immunity like test. And we believe that if the light and that was created in the absence again of legislative direction. So it's a valid that they're doing it because we don't have legislative direction that's the way we're going to go as a court. So it's incumbent upon you all to take to now I think invest that time and as you've been doing and and and make some decisions here about how how the court should act in these situations. And I believe it's very important that people be able to access justice and not have to jump over these hurdles which are presented by qualified immunity in general, and also presented in Zola. Thank you. Does that help Senator White. I wish I was an attorney. Because I really do find it all very confusing. And it, it is helpful but I do find it confusing. So I'll try to summarize it really succinctly Zulu does not cover the does not cover municipal employees that will have to be decided in later cases, and to Zulu creates a test similar to qualified immunity that still presents hurdles to getting justice for constitutional rights. Article 11 specifically. May I ask one more question, Senator Sears. Oh, where'd he go there. He's coming back now he must have jumped off. Okay. So what should the stand, should there be any standard at all, or should. Should people be able to just sue. If they feel their rights have been, I mean, should there be any standard at all. And I guess that's a question for Jay because you said that Zulu established a different standard slightly different than the federal standard but what what should there be a standard and what should it be, or should. There not be any standard, it's just, and, and again, I guess, and I know that that it's that police officers have huge authority and power over us. But the case that was that Mr. Myerson gave was a corrections officer, but we're not including them in here. We're not. Yeah. So, yeah, Senator white thank you for the question I think to answer the question. Should there be a standard, we believe that the standard should be where your rights violated. That's the question that we want to see asked, and that's the question the court has to ask right. We don't think there should be anything that prevents someone. If this is that question, yes, your rights were violated. We don't think there should be some this secondary test, or the secondary doctrine that says well only if they were violated in these in certain circumstances are certain ways. And the officer knew what they were doing or knew that knew the law knew they were violating the law we want to we just think that that is beside the point for as from a victim's perspective. And it's what makes victims feel like there's no justice, because when the court says to a victim of rights violation or excessive force, whatever it is. The court says to the victim, your rights were violated we agree with you. But you don't get any, any justice here. You don't get a judgment in fact the judgment is against you. And we feel that that's just, that's just not right.  He looks like he's frozen again. I know his internet is unstable. Yeah, up down and we'll drop back in. I'd say take over center, Bruce. All right. So, one second here while I just make sure. Ben, do you have anything you'd like to add here. You're muted then, then you're muted. Can Ben, can you guys hear me. Okay, I failed to unmute myself. So for the record, Ben Novograsky, Office of Legislative Council. I believe I can hopefully lend some clarity as far as the concerns and Senator white ways raised about the concept of what Zulu said as far as constitutional actions. You know, really with with that. Can I just break in Ben just for a second, I keep getting thrown out so Senator Bruce, please chair the meeting. This is my third time trying to get back in. Okay, no problem. Thank you. Go ahead. Sure. It was this concept of, and Senator right you were correct to the, to the degree in that the Supreme Court said that there are certain constitutional provisions that are quote unquote self executing that have an implied private right of action that you can bring to the court for remedy. However, the next step, or part of that analysis was even if you could bring an action, it was whether or not damages, or a proper remedy under the action you could bring, and part of the way that this bill was drafted would absolutely or reflect that language in the sense that the bills language kind of contains this self limiting language as far as constitutional action where it says, ones that provide a private right of action. What this bill would do was just attach a damages remedy to those actions that you can already bring. The Supreme Court said without legislative direction essentially that if there's another remedy for those violations, they'll look to find it. This bill is to provide direction to say that the remedy to be had is damages or money. So that's part of that so you're correct in the sense that you could bring them but this lens clarity as to what the result or remedy would be in those circumstances. And, you know, so I think that that was a point of confusion does that lend a little bit of clarity as far as those constitutional violations. It does thank you. I guess. What other remedy would there be. In that case specifically the state put forth a bunch of different alternatives. So you could do injunctive relief so basically saying that the state is prohibited from stopping vehicles that had covered registration stickers. I would say that you could bring an action under the federal statute section 1983. But as we've discussed the federal Constitution, the Fourth Amendment differs then our Vermont equivalent Vermont one provides broader protection so not all alternative would be adequate necessarily and so this is designed to just I think give consistency as opposed to where the courts have kind of have discretion on a case by case basis to decide one way or the other. And I think that also goes to the clearly established right issue that we were discussing earlier as well as that. You were correct I mean there is this is derived from Vermont case law in the sense that clearly established law just means that the contours of the right are sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what they are doing violates that is what you quoted before, but it's been interpreted that, you know, any lawyers love to debate and I think that again this is to provide to consistency for the courts, as opposed to the courts navigating it individually themselves. You know, so the purpose of this is to give some legislative direction to say that these are the rights that can be brought, and this is the remedy that can be sought, as opposed to the courts trying to do the analysis themselves on a case by case basis, trying to find similar circumstances to apply to a new case before them. Our agenda says committee discussion and next steps. And we're coming up on noon we have about 15 minutes left Senator Sears do you do you want to go there at this point. Well I think Senator White is, you know raise some important issues. Not the least of which is some confusion about different cases. I don't know if there's somebody who would like to speak from the opposition side on that on those issues we've heard from our ledge council we've heard from the opponents of the legislation jds and Brad Byerson. So I'm, I don't know if somebody would like to come on the other side. Will do would you like to comment. Well the white tougher Jones is here is also who works for an attorney for the Department of Public Safety. Maybe we can tag team and Tucker can talk about the cases and I can comment on other issues. And perhaps I'll start with. I'm speaking you know I have mad freedom, the organization I founded is opposed to this bill, and you know, I've been speaking here as also a policy consultant with Department of Public Safety, because you know our interest and concerns about the bill are aligned. And I'm not going to say now I haven't like run by anybody but I think it's important for this committee because these other bills from other jurisdictions were raised to understand a little bit about what those other bills have done. So I'd like to actually address that because I have talked about how this bill differs considerably from what other jurisdictions have done. And Brad Byerson alluded to those bills and I'd like to give you a little bit more detail about that, if I may. Yeah, I mean we've got about 10 minutes so I'll do it in less than that. Okay, so I talked about Colorado's bills so you know it's limited to count constitutional violations of the Colorado Constitution. It has a mandatory attorney's fee provision. It has a two year statute of limitations. And so I talked about that but what I'd rather talk about now is New Mexico in Connecticut, New Mexico particularly I think is a great example of good bill drafting. New Mexico eliminates qualified immunity for all government officials. They also have limitations on liability. So, like per occurrence, it's $2 million, and it goes up with inflation. That's responsible legislating. They also have a notice of claim provision so with one year of being injured, you have to file a notice of claim with the government. The government can actually manage the risk, right, because that's what you want to do the more information you have the more you can manage uncertainty. That's responsible legislating. They also have an explicit provision in the bill that it's not retroactive, very responsible legislation, a legislation because under this current bill, you haven't said one way or the other clever. I don't take exception to being called irresponsible. And that is very offensive to the chair to the vice chair and other members of this committee will die I don't know that you can say that we're irresponsible. I don't mean to say that you're, Senator says you are right to correct me if you feel like that's what I'm saying, I am not saying that what I'm saying is here is a bill that I think represents responsible You haven't passed any bill, you are looking at this and you're inviting people to comment to get to the best thing you can do. I wouldn't say you're responsible legislated you haven't even passed anything and that is not my intent to doing so. I welcome the fact that you've invited us to speak here and that's all I'm trying to do and if, and I apologize to anybody who thought I was contrasting your proposed bill, but you haven't passed on to these past bills. So thank you for correcting me because I don't want you leaving with that impression it wasn't what I was trying to say. Thank you. You're welcome. And the other thing that the New Mexico bill doesn't do. It doesn't aggregate all immunities right it only aggregate it only changes the qualified immunity. It doesn't change the statutory immunities or other amenities it's very limited. And then the last thing it does have a. It does provide for an indemnification provision makes clear that the, you know, any officer sued under the bill would be entitled to both legal defenses and the judgment. And then in terms of Colorado. And it's also limited in terms of, excuse me and the last thing they do is you don't have to pay if the officer or the officer has to reimburse. Excuse me. Excuse me so I'm going to go to. I'm going to stop and let Tucker talk so I know you're you're pressed for time. If you want to come back to Connecticut. Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you. Hello. Hello, everyone. Hello, chair Sears Senators my name is Tucker Jones I'm assistant general counsel at the Department of Public Safety. Chair Sears would you like me to speak. Now, in response to your earlier question about this concern regarding Zulu. We just lost center Sears again. Absolutely Tucker. We have, we have only about five or six minutes for you but please go ahead. Sure. Thank you. Chair bruce. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Vice chair bruce. Okay. So I've been studying this issue for quite some time and I've been following the committee testimony and discussion about this and the Colorado bill and law ending qualified immunity. You know, expressly created a cause of action under the Colorado. The Vermont Supreme Court had already done that. They had already created a cause of action under the Vermont search and seizure provision there. And in your legislative council has explained this in the memo comparing the two bills about how it does that. The Vermont Supreme Court had already done that they had already created a cause of action under the Vermont search and seizure provision in 2019. And the Vermont Supreme Court, they explicitly and this is of what's particular of particular relevance I think for this committee is that they explicitly created an alternative to the federal clearly established standard. And they provided that a plaintiff may show that an officer acted in bad faith. They defined bad faith, which as something that may exist when an officer's conduct could be viewed as objectively reasonable, but is characterized by ill will or wrongful motive, including discriminatory cases. When you Google this case, as Senator White alluded to the second entry I think is a summary of the case by what looked to be legislative council I think Eric Fitzpatrick just kind of summarizing the whole case in about six pages. And there's a note in in there under a lot underneath this alternative standard it says no this was a rejection of the United States Supreme Court's approach under the Fourth Amendment. Since the United States Supreme Court had held that the officers bad faith is otherwise irrelevant. If there is a neutral and reasonable basis for the search or seizure. I would consider this decision critical to understanding the legal landscape surrounding qualified immunity in Vermont. Because it's important to understand that the bad faith showing that a plaintiff may make under a claim under article 11 is an alternative to the clearly established federal standard, the clearly established standard that has been criticized by national and legal commentators and it's just very important for this committee to understand that we already have a cause of action under the state constitution and the unanimous Vermont Supreme Court considered these issues in quite a bit of detail. They considered whether it was appropriate to have some limitation akin to qualified immunity and the unanimous Supreme Court considered that it was appropriate and necessary to do so. And I think that's just a very important thing for this committee to understand that the Vermont Supreme Court has already weighed this issue and they thought that some protections akin to qualified immunity were appropriate but they provided an alternative to showing bad faith by an officer from their discriminatory animus or otherwise. So this is a key point because the reason the some version of qualified immunity is appropriate is because the courts want to ensure that the government employee is on fair notice that their conduct is violating the Constitution when they engage in that and the Supreme Court discussed this by specifically highlighting how this affects law enforcement officers operating in the field. And I think it would be helpful to explain this they said having no protection akin to qualified immunity could create a potential flood of litigation for every alleged constitutional violation. That's not my language. That's a unanimous decision by the Vermont Supreme Court that's their language we're just we're just letting you know that that language exists. And then they go on to say on a daily basis law enforcement officers must make numerous decisions on how to handle interactions with the citizens particularly motorists. Even with liability falling on the state, rather than the individual officer, a rule that exposes the state to a potential sim civil damages suit, following every roadside stop, or whenever a motion to suppress is granted, could inhibit law enforcement officers from taking some effective and constitutionally permissible actions in pursuit of public safety. This would not be an appropriate result. I, that one of the highlights of this paragraph and they say it in passing is that whenever a motion to suppress is granted. And what they're referring to there is on a regular basis, trial courts criminal courts in our state grant motions to suppress, which by their nature, state that an officer's actions were in violation of the Constitution. Now, there is no indication in those motions to suppress that are granted that the violations are necessarily anything other than a mistaken, but reasonable belief by the officer that conduct was appropriate at the time. But what we would be doing by eliminating qualified immunity is allowing a civil lawsuit with for potential of attorney's fees following every single motion to suppress that it's granted because by its very nature, those decisions are stating that the that the officer's conduct was unreasonable. And as the Vermont Supreme Court indicated that is both that's not an appropriate result, because it would result in a flood of litigation after every single one of those cases potentially, but it would also inhibit officers from carrying out their duties that we asked them to do, because they would be concerned about a potential civil suit, every time a criminal court grants emotion to suppress. So that's the legal considerations that the department views around this bill. There's many many other considerations but I know we're out of time for today. So it's an opportunity to discuss that further. Okay, we'll give you that opportunity on Thursday morning. But what was the name of that case. That's that Zulu v state 2019 vt one is okay. You're quoting from Zulu, which has created a great deal of confusion. So why don't we pick up there on Thursday morning. And I apologize to everyone. Especially willed or if I was a little bit overly sensitive about the irresponsible versus responsible language. Perhaps I was a bit oversensitive. I appreciate you bringing it up so that I can address it. So thank you. Thank you.


Plotting data in geomap app is very simple. First, scroll down under the menu, data sets and find water column properties. Next, scroll down to world ocean data for temperature, salinity, oxygen, and nutrients. At this point, a thousand locations will open up on a map. Select the location of which you want to plot data, and click. This will open up a table as seen below. Next, go to the right side of this table and point to the link while holding down command and shift, and this will open plots as shown here on the right. This plot shows temperature against depth, temperature on the y-axis and depth on the x-axis. If you want to view plots for salinity, oxygen, and nutrients, scroll down in the menu as shown here. For some of these sites, not all of the variables are represented, for example, oxygen and nutrients, in which case, choose another site close by on the map, or choose another site in the table, and click holding down command and shift, and this will open up a new set of plots.