In the early 1990s, a game for the dust system was released by a developer named Sean Puckett. It went by the name Helios. The game was shareware and was not very well known. There was another game very similar to Helios known as Helios 2. Despite Helios 2 sounding like a sequel, it very much wasn't, and what Sean did was split the original Helios into and sell the latter half as Helios 2 for $24.99 in US dollars. Unfortunately, both games weren't just fine for a Windows 32 bit system. Not much is known about Sean Puckett himself. The only thing known on him online is his very outdated company, Albino Frog Software, and his website. The company itself was originally known as Night Spy, before being inexplicably renamed to Albino Frog Software. The game, Helios, is odd. If a player were to start up the game, the first screen would be a text story about the backstory of the game. The back story is as follows. Helios, how to produce a game in 8 days. First off, I know you won't believe my story. That's alright. You don't have to believe it. I know it happened, and that's good enough for me. Besides, Helios is fun whether or not you believe how it came to be.  With Lee Strieber, now there's a nutcase, I'd think to myself. I used to watch Project Blue Book when I was a kid, but that was just TV. I watched Star Trek II. So on May 5, 1993, UFOs were the farthest thing from my mind. But, of course, when you're least expecting it, when, your life gets turned upside down, I usually get to bed around 3 in the morning. That night was a little stormy, unusual for Florida in May, especially 1993. A bit of lightning kicking off now and then, and the steady hiss of the rain, girdle of the gutters, occasional car going past slinging yellowed headlight beams through my bedroom window.  Very faint, far away. We live near a small airport, so the throaty growl of a private plane is something we are used to, and rarely take notice of. Even the eerie drone of the blimps also lured nearby as common enough not to warrant a look. But this was unusual. Private planes, as a rule of thumb, don't fly during storms, or at 3 in the morning. The blimps were certainly well tied down against the gusty wind. So what was this noise, this hum, that was growing louder? Police helicopter, maybe. They always seemed to conduct late-night reconnaissance missions in my neighborhood just when I'm dropping off to sleep. Mayor's dog has probably gotten loose again. The light flicking in my windows seemed to confirm this. A strong searchlight beam, apparently, taking inventory of my front yard. Nothing there fells. No dogs, no escaped convicts. It was at this point that fear struck me. The light, I just realized, was green. The most brilliant green I had ever seen. No headlight was ever that color. No searchlight would ever be green, and so steady. The hum, having gradually gotten louder over the past minute seemed constant in volume now, but the tone was changing. Of its initial droning pitch, it seemed to be modulating, varying in pitch slightly. There I was, standing near my window, bathed in bright green light, listening to another worldly hum coming apparently from right overhead. What would you do? I'll tell you what I did. I ran like a man possessed, nearly killing myself tripping over a stack of phone books in my mad rush to get to the other side of the house, to the door, outside, to safety. No way am I going to be trapped in this house with who knows what weirdness, be it spacemen, the CIA, or maybe the Illuminati. I flung open the door, and outside, where the garbage cans should have been was a bright shaft of greenish light. Standing in the light, swathed in mist, was a perfect copy of myself with its hand outstretched as if to open the door to get out. In the movies, the hero would now do a groucho-marked routine and see if the image moved the same way he did, then he would make friends, learn a new alien language, draw up a treaty, all that stuff. I instead fainted, and fell flat on my face into the weeds. My last thought was, there go the movie rights. I don't know how long I was out, whoever does. But it was dark when I woke up. No green light, no mirror image, no burbling hum. The door was still open. The garbage cans were back where they belonged. The rain had lessened to a light drizzle. The full moon was peeking through the thinning clouds. I stumbled around the soddy yard, in a daze. I had a vague suspicion that there would be some sort of alien thing waiting for me in the house, so I didn't really want to go back inside. But the eventual realization that I was wandering around my front yard in the wee hours of the morning under a full moon with only my skivvies on made a certain impression on me. So rather than make a big scene waking the neighbors up and trying to sound less like a deranged lunatic, which I probably was, and more like a damp, frightened victim of UFO harassment, in his skivvies, I peered in all the windows, looking for suspicious green glows. I didn't see anything strange inside, so I crept back to the door and made my way in, slowly, listening, carefully. I fired up all the lights at once with the light control system. Nothing amiss. Checked the closets, no alien ambassadors. Looked in the shower, no mutants. Opened all the kitchen cabinets, no extraterrestrial slime molds, no super space roaches, nothing. Everywhere I looked, zip. I was beginning to relax. Checked the computer room, turned on the computers, made sure all the drives were okay. Perfect. The data, my latest projects, were safe. Much more relaxed now, delayed stress syndrome kicked in, and I got a sudden, incredible case of the shakes. My heart started to pound, my knees got all weak, and I sank into the chair. And instantly right out of it I leapt, like an 800 volt cat. I always leave my chair tucked under the desk, but it had been in the middle of the room when I came in. I grabbed up the nearest blunt object, my VCR remote, and scanned the room intently. I don't know what I planned to do with the remote, but there it was, and whatever happened to me, I wanted to die with a weapon in my hand. I kicked the chair away, and it whirled into a corner. I stood still for many moments, listening, looking. But nothing moved, nothing happened. The bright eye of my computer monitor patiently blared at me, almost seeming to say, What are you up to? I warily wandered over to the cabinets and, looking my foot under the door, opened each one. Junk, just like I left it. The shelves of books appeared to be undisturbed. My desk drawers I opened with a back scratcher at three paces. A mishmash of printouts and faxes. Nothing. Looked under the desk. Dust bunnies. Hell.  All this paranoia because I left my chair out for once in my life. I sat heavily into it, and wheeled up to the computer keyboard. In the cracks between the keys were traces of green fluid. On the disk drive handle, more. I bolted to my feet once more, and searched the whole house again with a flashlight, this time checking each and every cranny. Nothing. Nowhere. Just traces of green slime on the keyboard, and the disk drive. Okay. All this UFO roared up to my house at three in the morning in the middle of a thunderstorm, scares me till I faint, and the only evidence I have of it is some rapidly evaporating green blop on my computer. And, what's this? A new directory on the hard drive. A collection of files in it. Right. Sure. Aliens brought me some files. Probably interstellar shareware, right? I copied the files onto a disk, deleted them from the hard drive, a complete systems check, virus check, disk integrity check, everything. Nothing was wrong. I go over to the testing machine, and punch up the files on the disk. No read.b. Why am I not surprised? But there is a bunch of source files, and one executable file. I don't mind running strange things on the test machine, that's what it's for.  What I got then is very similar to what you now have before you in Helios. An incredibly strange, surreal game. No scoring, no words, just some weird symbols. I showed it to some friends and told them where I got it. They quite disbelieved my story, but they did like the game, and had never seen it, or anything like it, before. Someone suggested I upload it to a board, so I decided to, but not, until I tacked on the title screen and some good old fashioned American entrepreneurial spirit. I divided the game into two segments, and now you have the first half. You can order the second half directly from me, the address is in the order form. And that's how you got your copy of Helios. I made up the name, and the title screen. It's a Van Gogh, of course, and seemed appropriate. When the player would continue, the next screen would be of a tentacle, made of decreasingly smaller science spheres on top of an interlaced web of something gray. Surrounding the tentacle would be a color wheel made of spheres in a polygonal pattern of nine colors, red, orange, yellow, light green, dark green, cyan, blue, purple and pink. Surrounding the spheres would be nine inexplicable symbols, each to their respective color sphere. Each symbol is different, making a total of nine different symbols. In the background of the spheres would be descending rings, almost like a surface mine. The player would control the tentacle, moving it around as if the biggest science sphere were pinned to the web. If the player moves the tip of the tentacle in the directions of one of the colored spheres with a mouse. If the player clicks in the direction of the spheres, the symbol near the sphere changes, turning into the symbol of the sphere to the clockwise direction of it. It turns out that this menu is actually a screen to enter a code, the spheres themselves being a level select. To unlock the web of spheres, you must play the game. To select a level, the player must point the tentacle toward one of the colored spheres, and yet enter. The screen would then change to that of one centered on an almost balloon-like sphere. The player would then use the arrow keys to propel the balloon forward. The method of propulsion is almost as if it's a rocket in space. The balloon blows out some sort of white gas to push it. The physics are very much like space as well, using the laws of inertia, meaning that if you propel the ball forward, then it won't stop until it gets something, and in fact then it only just bounces off of it. Each level is different. Some are simple mazes.  One thing that is similar between these levels however, is the extreme tiling, as in the same object or background is repeated again and again. These tiles make up the walls and floors of the level. The objective of the game is to go around each level and collect some sort of blue gems. When the player collects all of the gems, a small flag with the level's symbol appears. The player then moves over to the flag, and when they go over it with the balloon, it turns it into one of the symbols from the main menu. This symbol is part of the sequence on the web of spheres, and when you enter it into its colored sphere, and the rest from the completed levels, the final screen appears. And well, the screen is indescribable, so the only way this can be shown is through a photo format. The screen isn't still. Usually a small, almost sinister sounding alien drone sounds through the background, while the small signballs float toward the center. This is Helios. No one knows whether aliens actually made this game or not. No one knows what any of this is supposed to mean. The only person who has a clue about the game is Sean Puckett, but no one knows this guy or even if he still exists. Any way of contacting him is extremely out of date, whether through the game's addresses or the albino frog's outdated website. However there is one question. Are we alone?


So, we are now live on YouTube, it is Friday, April 23rd, 2021, and we are taking up an amendment to S-145 that is being offered by Senator Ron, and the amendment... 145. ...JRTJ... I'm sorry, the being taken is being offered by Senator Ron, and I'm going to let her explain the amendment, and then we're going to hear from John Campbell, I think Julio Thompson, and Mike Shirley. Senator Ron, do you want me to make you the co-host to share? I think... Actually, can you bring, share it? Sure. Bryn, you're the co-host. She drafted it. Yes, I don't need that kind of responsibility in my life. Just sort of here to give a conceptual overview, and I really appreciate Bryn's help and work on this as judiciary. It's not my sort of native land here, but as I was listening to the debate and discussion yesterday around H-145, in kind of marquee lights, I was just seeing credibility as a big concern underlying the culture that you are trying to create with this bill of accountability around what is reasonable use of force for a police officer. You raised the murder of George Floyd as an example of why language like this would be helpful and important, and as you may have seen, the first report out of the police department was calling three officers standing on someone's back and, including his airway, a medical incident. In the case of Adam Toledo, the first reports before the body cam footage came out were around him having a gun in his hand. So, Dante Wright, I meant to reach for my taser and instead I reached for my gun. We have a question, I think, in this country and in the state around what an officer testifies to have happening in an incident versus what we end up seeing and investigating around body cam footage and other evidence that we may have. As you may also be aware, there was a recent Human Rights Commission case involving Clemens Family Farm where there were concerning allegations that a trooper was coaching essentially someone squatting on their land and that was caught on dash cam footage and other video footage. And so, you know, when I heard the discussion, it occurred to me that I had been working on language with Bryn around giglio files and the ways that we have currently in statute to try and hold officers accountable to accurate and accurately represented information about incidents. What I have heard from several state's attorneys who actually were the ones to raise this with me is that there are agencies and local law enforcement departments that perceive in some way that this is somehow discretionary for state's attorneys to be adding information about falsified or misclassified information to someone's disclosures or giglio files. And as you probably know, this has a lot to do with their credibility to take the stand in a court case, including their ability to be a investigator on the scene of a crime for murders, etc. And we should take that very seriously, you know, their ability to be a credible witness on the stand and if they've had those kinds of inaccuracies before and the information that they've presented.  And so, you know, you'll hear more from Brynn about the ways that that would need to be embedded in statute in order for that to be the case. But I did have state's attorneys say they welcomed this change because it would stop law enforcement from in some way making it losing trust with law enforcement because law enforcement is seeing it as some something they would have discretion over and that it should be clear that they this is their duty as a state's attorney and anyone on the on the in this, you know, defending the state and the state's interests that they have this information available. I think what you may hear, I did talk to the attorney general this morning and you may hear that it's in the interest of the attorney general's office to try and at some point have this information in a more public repository or some kind of central location, which I think would be a logical next step. But what I'm asking for today is that we clarify that this is a non-discretionary piece of our justice system that we know about officer misconduct and the misclassification or misrepresentation of information before we're giving them the benefit of the doubt about what level of reasonable force they used in a situation. Dick, you're muted. That was great. I was telling Senator White she's muted. And I was muted. Great Zoom. I love it. I finally got hooked up. I'm not sure why it's echoing. Do you have another device going, Jeanette? Actually, you're on. You've got the other device. You're on twice, Senator White. Oh, I thought I went off on that one. No, it's still on. I think that's why you're muted. Why would it still be on? Do you want me to try to remove it? I can try. Remove the blank Senator White and leave us with the real Senator White. That's the evil Senator White and the good Senator. You did it, Peggy. Great job. Thank you. Peggy's going to go to work for IT next week. Keisha, I apologize for having device issues this morning. But so I missed the part, and I did read it last night, but it was the language was a little too legalese for me, so I appreciate your explanation. Is there a difference between purposeful misrepresentation and just reporting something that, in the moment, seemed one way and wasn't another way?  I think it's a good question for the state's attorneys. I only have examples, and it would still rely on the corroboration or the sort of clarification from probably other witnesses or officers. One example was saying that someone was slammed to the ground, but had their hands free, were not handcuffed, when in fact they were handcuffed, which is a very different situation. So the examples that I've heard are pretty sort of clear, one way or another. So I think there's probably some level of discretion that will always exist for a state's attorney to say they seem to be knowingly misrepresenting the information or not, but the examples I've heard are pretty clear. And if you have, say, an officer say, I shot them because they had a gun in their hand and then there's clear body cam footage that they did not have a gun in their hand, I think that's still information that the public should know, regardless of whether or not they knowingly believed that if they thought they saw a gun in someone's hand, I think that's still valuable information for everyone to have and not just take the word of the officer. I don't know if we're at the point, you all would know better if we have body cam footage from every incident in the state, but to the extent that we do not, we still should allow the public to know information about an officer's history of misclassifying information to be able to access justice. So forgive me. Reading the Digger article, Tarnished Badge, I thought that it was clear there are certain officers who state's attorneys just won't call as witnesses because they're not credible or they've been proven to not be credible and often wondered how they can stay on the job. Senator, the other bill last year, a companion to this bill, 145, was the, I can't remember the number, it came out of Senator Waite's committee, it was more on the declassification, I mean, decertification, other measures that can be taken with law enforcement bring. Can you explain the difference between what this does and those officers who are no longer credible to testify on bills? I'm sure that, and doesn't the state already have an obligation to give all information to the defense? So to answer your first question, throw the record, Bryn Herron from Legislative Council, to answer your first question, I'm not sure I can answer it actually because I didn't work on that bill in Senator Waite's committee, but I can tell you that there is existing common law that requires that the prosecution turn over certain types of evidence to the defense and that includes what was commonly called as Brady material and Giglio material. And the idea with the amendment is really to codify those existing common law requirements. But, and you can look at the language, I do think it makes the requirement a little bit broader by the way it defines prosecution team because it requires anyone on the prosecution team who has these types of evidence, the types of evidence that would tend to negate the guilt of the defendant or the types of evidence that may undermine the credibility of a witness. If that information is available to anyone on the prosecution team, they are required to turn it over. So in that way, I do think it extends, is a little bit greater of an obligation than what exists in common law. Other questions for either Senator Rahm or Bryn? John Campbell, Executive Director to state's attorneys and sheriffs. Morning. Morning. John Campbell for the record, state's attorneys and sheriffs. I have to say I'm a little surprised on a couple of things. Number one, that this topic is on this bill, but, and again, also the timing of it, this is like my understanding is third reading. And the whole concept of Brady Giglio would take, we could take a whole morning to discuss it because so many people just misunderstand what the obligations are. This bill, I think what it does it conflates the two legal obligations that we have, not just under common law, we have it also as we're under professional rules, conduct number 3.8. They have a specific rule just for prosecutors that states exactly this about what, that we have to disclose information. So there's a professional conduct side. Additionally, and as Senator Belling knows, there's also rule 16 that is discovery rule. And it tells you exactly what has to be disclosed, which is all Brady material. The Brady material is material that tends to negate the guilt or exculpatory evidence that would be beneficial to the defendant. We have an ongoing obligation to present that, to provide it to the defense. The Giglio aspect of this, what's called Giglio letters that everybody has been referring to, that goes to the impeachment side at a trial. So if we know that there's an issue, not just with police officers, this goes with all witnesses we have. If we know that there's something about that witness that would go to their truth or their veracity or just to indicate any type of bias, then that information is we send it in the letter to the defense counsel and advise them of that. This, and also let me just say too, and I'll do respect Senator Ram, I don't know what state's attorney she's talking to, but this is a mandatory requirement. This is an obligation that's mandatory under common law, under rule 16 and under professionals conduct. There's no discretion here. We have to disclose this information. If not, we are subject to significant sanctions both by a court and also by a professional conduct board. And I believe, I mean, this is another thing you probably should check with the professional conduct board to see if anybody's ever brought, or how many complaints have ever been brought for under 3.8. So, and again, the state's attorney is again, I don't know who you talk, who's been talked, spoken to, but they, we, every summer when we do our training, this is one of the major things we do. We do it repeated all the time, especially for the new individuals coming in that they have these obligations. It's something that in criminal procedure in law school, I mean, you learn this. It's not, this is nothing that's new. This is nothing that's avant garde. This is something that is a basic requirement in criminal law. The, my concern with this, with this language, again, it conflates two specific areas that are already dealt with across the board. And then kind of broadens it. And as such, there's going to be a conflict with what we already have in criminal rules. In fact, what concerns me is I believe that the way this is written here, because it does not include the exceptions that are there for certain, and you'll understand what exceptions, why they're there, but there are exceptions that would probably require us now to disclose the names and identity of confidential informants. I think it would also question whether we have to deliver work product and also the victim's names and addresses. These are all exceptions that are set out and in the rule, the rule 16, but it's not here. By trying to do this quickly like this, I think you all are making a major mistake that you're going to end up having unintended consequences across the board and possibly doing more harm for what we are trying to do. And that is to have more transparency than you realize. Again, I wish I had more time, but I just saw this amendment last night. More than happy. I know I've spoken to this. Many of the state's attorneys last night were very concerned that they were, and they're also very shocked that this was even brought up because of the fact that we do have the continuing obligation and that this is something that they do on a regular basis. Whether they're shocked that it's been brought up or not, any senator has a right to walk up or not. I understand what Bill, I mean, you know that. So, and whether or not it's germane to the bill is a question that Loomer has to answer, if somebody questions. So, I just, it is obviously a fairly complex area of the law that many of us are not that familiar with. But I'm not sure we're getting at the prosecutor. That's, I guess it's a question for Senator Romer or a Bryn. Is this getting at the prosecutor or the police officer? Because if the prosecutor is already required to give this information, what happens if the police officer is not given? There's a case, ironically, there's a case in the Bennington court yesterday where they went to the Supreme Court because they believed the police officer had got the wrong person. And the identity from the witness had to do with did the person have a beard? Did they have a tattoo or a goatee? And did they have silver caps on their teeth? That sort of thing. And the guy that they got doesn't appear to have that. So, there was that question. I don't think that was the prosecutor. I think it was the police officer who did the investigation. So, does this go to the police officer or the prosecutor? Or get at them? Well, I think the answer is really both. The obligation is on the prosecution team, which can include an investigative officer who's working on the case. But I think that the idea behind that, at least the Giglio file portion, is to codify the requirement that the prosecution team turn over any information that might indicate that one of their witnesses could be impeached on the stand. So, I think in that way it goes, it would apply to both. Thank you. That's all. Any comments? Senator White? And would it also apply to witnesses as, John? I mean, not just police officers, but if I'm a witness, it would also apply to me. Yes. Okay. It would apply to any witness who the prosecution is using to establish an element of the crime. Okay. Okay. Any questions for John Campbell? Thank you for being here on short notice, John. Thank you. Julio Thompson, chair, representing the attorney general's office. Julio, thank you for being here on short notice. We really appreciate it. Thank you. I'm just trying to get my video in order. I'm getting it right now. I'll continue. Yeah, we can hear you. I can't see you. It's been a problem this morning that a lot of folks have had technical difficulties. Well, for the record, my name is Julio Thompson, assistant attorney general, director of civil rights unit. You know, our office, the attorney general, certainly agrees with Senator Rahm and others that have spoken that the duty to disclose information that could be used to impeach a witness in a prosecution isn't a discretionary duty. It's a constitutional duty that's been around, that's been articulated since the Giglio case in 1972. So almost 50 years now. And as I heard, I received a copy of this bill yesterday. And as I read in subsection A, and as I heard Ledge counsel say today that the point of the bill here is to codify the, you know, the existing duty and statute for the purposes of ensuring that there's no mistaking that this is a duty and not a recommendation. And I think that from the state's attorney's office that referenced to rule 16 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, which are issued by the Vermont Supreme Court, I think is important that section B of that does identify in a way the Giglio rule, as well as the exceptions that have been recognized under it. For example, with confidential informants, there's a procedure by which, under the rules of evidence that the Vermont Supreme Court issued where the court would have its own private hearing where, you know, without jeopardizing the disclosure of a confidential informant to see whether the information that's to be provided, you know, is material to the evidence of the case. It is an objective standard that the prosecutor has to follow the rule is that there has to be, you have to disclose if there's a reasonable possibility that disclosure of the information could undermine their case. Not a certainty, but also not a remote possibility either. So to the extent that the rule is articulating the existing standard, you know, I think we're supportive of that because I have not been involved in any discussions about Giglio or anything like that, but if there is this idea that it is something that's a should rather than a shall, then that's something we would certainly want to eliminate. With respect to this issue about the scope of the rule and the prosecution team extending to the police, I guess I would clarify or expand upon what you've heard from Ledge Council about whether that duty extends to people who are not just the prosecutors. And that's already existing law. In 1995, there was a case called the Kiles case, Kiles v. Whitney, saying that information that's known only to the police who are part of the arrest team and part of the investigation is also subject to that disclosure rule. The idea of being that due process doesn't want, or the court doesn't want to have a system set up where the prosecution team kind of sticks their head in the sand once they've got the evidence that's favorable to their case. And so it indirectly mandates the prosecutor to inquire of the law enforcement agency, to affirmatively look for that information to get it. And then I guess the discretion that is involved here is whether the prosecutor is going to use the evidence. The prosecutor gets to decide what witnesses are going to put on. And Giglio really has to do with information that would be used to impeach the credibility of witnesses. So I'm not sure. I don't see an expansion of the existing rule here, which I think is, which makes subsection A, I think, consistent. It's basically an intent to codify the rule. I think that to avoid confusion, it would be helpful perhaps to indicate not only that this confirms the obligations under this case law, but also make sure that it has some reference that it's not intended to override the more detailed procedural rules that are set forth in Rule 16, both under the federal rules of criminal procedure and under virtually every state's rules of criminal procedure. That's where the finer details about what do you do about things like attorney work product, that privilege material at the federal level, there are exceptions relating to national security exceptions that may come up in federal cases. So. Fortunately, Bryn has to leave, Julio. Thank you, Bryn. Thanks, Bryn. So I think it would be helpful if the committee's going to go forward with the amendment to ensure that there's some reference, some kind of preservation language or savings language with respect to Rule 16.1, because I didn't hear today or read in the text any intent to undo what the Supreme Court has done in Rule 16 for a long time. So I guess that's where I would stop and if there are questions, I can answer them. Well, Marley has a question. Thank you. Are there any questions, Julio? I'm sorry. I'm going to go take care of the dog, the barking, the grazing. Senator Bruce, can you take over from the door? Do you want Commissioner Scherling next? Commissioner Scherling. Are you here to comment on the draft? I was good. Good morning, Senator. I was here initially to listen in and comment as necessary. We've only had the bill for an hour and 10 minutes or so, so a little disadvantaged. I'm just briefly and listening to the testimony. A couple things stand out. I agree with both what Julio and John Campbell have said. I'm a little concerned about moving swiftly with something that is so technical for the committee's background. I was a criminal law instructor at the police academy for, I don't know, a great many years from the mid to late 90s through the mid 2000s. And I can tell you that embedded in the criminal law curriculum are discussions of both Brady and Giglio and the mandatory nature of reporting exculpatory evidence, in the case of Brady, and reporting issues of credibility in regards to Giglio. And it's something that we deal with on a fairly regular basis annually in conversations with prosecutors, ensuring I think to a fault, for the most part, I think what you see around the state is in many cases overreporting of Giglio issues, in particular, to ensure that the prosecutor's got the full array of things that may be necessary to disclose under those rules. So that's just a little bit of cursory background on the fly on short notice. It strikes me in at least preliminarily and listening to the initial testimony here that one solution to this may be to codify in a more simplified fashion to point to the rules of evidence and to point to the Brady and Giglio decisions and as the current draft says, their progeny and just state that those things are mandatory for law enforcement organizations to comply with, that it's not just something that applies to prosecutors because by extension, it's kind of meaningless if it applies to prosecutors, but you're not getting reports from law enforcement agencies. Again, I'm not aware of that happening, but if you want to address this in statute in the future, there may be a more simplistic way to do that and ensure that all of the complexity that goes with both the rules and the existing case law are preserved and not harmed in any way. Those are some preliminary thoughts, but again, it is very difficult to digest something this technical with so many potential implications on the existing way that business is conducted on an hour's notice. Thank you, Commissioner. Dick, you're muted. Thank you. I appreciate that, Commissioner. I'm feeling like we're a little bit, that this is an issue that deserves more attention than Senator Romer would willing to introduce a bill on it. I think it should be addressed, but I don't know if H-145 is the place to do it at this point, but the credibility, I mean, it goes back to things, bills that we have passed in this committee regarding innocence protection, the use of lineups, all of those things are all related to making sure we get the right person and that we've done it correctly. And Commissioner Shirling is to be commended, I think, for, I will say in my district, well, a lot of people are upset that a certain trooper has been charged. The fact is it was members of the team that was there that made the case and rather than the defendant claiming something, defendant claims. You don't even remember the situation. It was really intoxicating. There were, I think, three state police officers there, the other two felt that the officers struck the defendant and so it was unnecessary or unnecessary use. Senator Benning, I know you have to run. I do, and I wanted to make a couple of comments before I did. Senator Romer, I appreciate this attempt. As a criminal defense attorney, I'm always into making sure my clients are covered in every respect. As I think about the history of my own business, I've probably represented over 2,500 criminal defendants through the years. And I would say that probably 95.4% of them have, when walking through a police officer's affidavit, stopped me and said, no, the officer's lying about what that is. And in my own head, trying to think through this bill, I feel like I haven't had enough time to wrap my head around how that would all factor into what's going on here. And just so you know, for practical purposes, I practice in St. Johnsbury in Gil Hall and in Newport and then all three of those cases, maybe not with Vince and Lucy, because I don't think I've ever received one, but what we'll call a giglio letter that involves a specific police officer has traditionally been sent by the prosecution. And it is shocking when you get it, because the prosecutor is letting you know that they have no intention of using this person either as a witness in the specific case, or in any future cases going forward. So on the one hand, I'll compliment the state in taking that responsibility pretty seriously. The only nervousness I have here right now is I haven't thought through the process. If I call the state's attorney and I say, well, my client says, police officer so-and-so lied on this occasion about this event, at what point does that information get factored into what you're trying to do here to codify something? And I really personally feel like as a criminal defense attorney who totally supports your bill, that I would like to be able to flesh that out in my head before I leave to any conclusions. But just so you know, we hear a lot about what goes on around the United States and how police officers have been kept secret for one thing or another, as we do priests and a whole lot of other things. But in Vermont, at least in my criminal experience, police officers and prosecutors have been very good about trying to make sure any exculpatory information is provided or even a potential for that is addressed. So right now I feel like there's a system that is working. And if you're going to codify something, which I have no problem with, I want to make sure even every possible base that I've experienced has been covered. And I don't feel like I've got the ability to think that through between now and when this bill gets read for the third time, which I have to say I have to leave. I may not get back to have it during its third reading. So I don't even have that time to digest this. But for the committee, should we go to third reading and something comes up that would be a problem, I would respectfully ask that the bill be passed over so that I can come back and participate in the process before third reading takes place. Will do.  Thank you, Senator. And in listening to Senator Benning's comments, it struck me that I left out a critical piece of background, which is that in the two agencies that I've been most intimately involved in, in both Burlington and with the state police, when an officer is found to have a veracity issue, in other words, they lie of an official account of anything, whether that's an affidavit or something else, that is fatal to their career. So it should be a rare occurrence that giglio letters, A, occur, and then B, that there are future cases involving that particular officer, because, well, I can't speak to every agency in Vermont in their practices for the most part in the agencies that I'm familiar with and the ones that I have worked in, veracity issues are fatal. And we tell people that in those academy classes that I described as well, that your word is the most important asset that you've got.  So you must report all facts known to you, including those are exculpatory, and your veracity must be maintained throughout your career to a fault. And while that doesn't always happen, because we employ humans who are flawed, that is stressed and restressed from the time people are in the academy forward. Hello, did you want to comment? Mr. Chair, may I say one before Senator? Sure, please do. I just want to say before Senator Benning has to go because as a colleague, I know how stressful it can be if you're the reporter for Bill and you don't know what might happen on third reading. I did tell the chair and the vice chair that if it's the will of the committee to keep looking into this issue and getting more information before bringing an issue like this to the floor, then I would absolutely honor that and not push for an amendment today or even next Tuesday because that's not necessarily enough time to cover all of your basis. So I just didn't want you to leave feeling like you might have to hear this via some other means later today. I appreciate that, Senator. My colleagues are fairly competent in this area actually and sometimes they scare me because they know more than I do. But I think the issue is certainly a good topic for conversation. I would hope that you understand that and that we not try to do something too quickly because it may have unintended consequences and I haven't even thought those out yet even though I support this concept. Thank you. Senator White and then Julio. So I was I was just going to say that it seems to me that all of us are appreciative of the introducing the concept and that and when I think about how much time we spent talking about the word feasible and how little time we have to do this. I personally would appreciate this not being added as an amendment to the bill but coming in as its own standalone bill and really digging into it and taking testimony. So I appreciate Senator Rom bringing it forth. But that's my sentiment and I know that we're running behind time so I thought I'd say that so that maybe we didn't need to continue. Discussing it. Julio did you want to comment? Yeah before I left today I just wanted to address something that Senator Rom mentioned earlier when she spoke about this idea of a registry. So as I mentioned earlier under the Kyle's decision the prosecutor has an affirmative duty to go look for this evidence from the folks including law enforcement that are part of the investigative team. Some of the issues that were raised in the newspaper article and my only source is the newspaper article and the attachments that they provided. Is that you know they're one county? I mean officers move from department to department and there's no I think at least it was asserted in the article. There's no currently right now no easy way other than to just pick up the phone and start making calls to find out whether an officer has something in their in their history that might tend to impeach their credibility like a sustained finding of dishonesty for example. And so I think that irrespective of whether the committee goes for this this amendment and I think as I said we absolutely support making sure everyone understands that they have to follow the Giglio standard. But that one thing that might facilitate the or to or to make sure that the prosecutors are making those disclosures is to make it easier for them to find that information because under both just for confidence in the system and also for the individual accused under Giglio you don't have to show that the prosecutor intentionally suppress the information. It's that they even if it was inadvertent and but it could have undermined the confidence or reasonably undermine the confidence of the verdict then it's a violation. And so making it more difficult for or making it less likely that mistakes or oversights would happen is something that I think that we would look forward to working with folks on. And like I said we'll do it at you know whatever time the committee wants to do. But again it is it is crucial and Senator Rom pointed out or as well as Ledge Council it's not just the prosecutor's office it's the team on that and that extends not only to the investigative officers but in some of the cases you see reported nationally forensic officers you know these headcases and other states where lab technicians have been found to engage in and conduct that's not appropriate and you can read in the newspapers or in the court reporters about disclosures that aren't made that may have undermined confidence in the physical evidence not just eyewitness Massachusetts has had a huge problem with that recently. Yeah so the number of cases have been dismissed or even people who were in jail let out because of the falsification of some lab stuff Senator Rom Well I just wanted to say Mr. Chair you've given me and this issue a great deal of time for the end of session and for the other work you have to do today and I appreciate other senators raising that you know this this is important to us building trust and credibility in our sworn law enforcement officers so that all Vermonters can feel safer in their presence and having them in their community so I do look forward to getting you a bill and doing some of the work we've discussed today so that that bill can be considered in a more robust way by the committee and I just I do appreciate all the time you've given this because it's hard to have a conversation about reasonable standards and and law law enforcement conduct without talking about these critical issues of credibility and eyewitness reporting so really appreciate your time and I will not ask the committee for a vote or anything like that I would I think it's the sense of the committee that it's an it's a topic that deserves to have full blown hearings and I would appreciate I don't think it can happen this session I think it it would be something that we would certainly put foremost next year in this committee of what we're all still here well wait a minute this is the second I was going to say I hope you all are still here but sorry yeah I got a little confused about what year it is so I I would think this would be a topic of importance but I also think the topic of that Senator White has worked so hard on in terms of the decertification of officers and having information when officers go from one district one police department or agency to another is foremost and I went through that with teachers who and obviously in the Catholic Church they're the same problem that people place to another to continue to do things and thank you very much Senator Ron appreciate you being thank you and Julio and John Campbell and Commissioner Shirling and others thank you for being here on short notice and I appreciate it thank you Mr. Chair


Remember a Hallmark card when you carry it up to send the very best. And Robert Schumann, chosen by one of the world's best-known authors, the distinguished novelist, Mr. James Hilton. Gentlemen, this is James Hilton. This evening of Valentine's Day, we dramatize on our Hallmark Playhouse a story of true love that is also a true story. We tell of the lifelong romance of Robert and Clara Schumann, the partnership of a great composer and a great concert pianist who became his wife. Clara, indeed, was one of the most famous women in all musical history, and with her husband's music in our ears, we shall hark back to that enchanted world in which the Schumanns were two stars in a constellation, for it was also the world of Liszt, Wagner, Chopin, Mendelssohn and Brahms. Clara Schumann, who was known and admired by them all, lived long and busily, a wonderful woman to the last, and died within the memory of many of us. To play her part tonight, we are proud to welcome back to our Playhouse that charming and popular actress and Academy Award winner, Joan Fontaine. And now here is Frank Goss from the makers of Hallmark cards. When you're looking for a way to say something to someone you care for, look for a Hallmark card, and you'll find the right words. Because Hallmark cards are designed to say what you want to say, the way you want to say it, and in the good taste you demand of anything that bears your personal signature. That's why Hallmark on the back of a greeting card has come to mean you cared enough to send the very best. And now Hallmark Playhouse presenting the story of Clara and Robert Schumann, starring Joan Fontaine. There's a crowded crowd control in London just less than a century ago. The program has included a symphony by Robert Schumann, and then a concerto by Robert Schumann. And now from the grand piano comes a cascade of silver notes, the final encore. The brilliance of the playing and the beauty of the music combine to electrify the listeners. But there's another reason. The pianist is a woman, the wife of the composer, and when the melody soars to its lovely climax, the audience is straining to applaud. One of the greatest pianists of her day and certainly the most beloved makes her bow to the audience and to the conductor and then leaves the stage. A moment later she's in her dressing room where she can retreat, relax and remember and speak in her mind the words of her heart. Did you hear it, Robert? Their applause was for you.  It sings in the hearts of men everywhere as it is sung in mind through all these years. So many years, my dear. But why try to count them? Happiness is not measured by the calendar. It lives in its own moments and in memories. Yes, in my happiness began the day we first met. You had come to my father's house in Leipzig, and I was peeking at you from behind the piano, and then Papa discovered me. Ah, klar! Would you like to meet my new pupil? This is Herr Schumann. Well, well, what do you say to the gentlemen? You must forgive her, my boy. She is most shy. I like children to be shy, Herve. How old are you, Clara? She is just nine, and yet she has already played her first public recital. Yes, she is my prized pupil. Herr Schumann?  Don't let my mother or my guardian hear that. They won't have me a piano player, so I'm studying something else. Something you wouldn't understand. I would so. I can understand anything. You were studying for the law, and you had time for only a few piano lessons. And then you went away to Heidelberg. It was three years before you came back. I have made my choice, Herve. The law is not for me. My future is music, and now I place my future in your hand. It was like an elder brother, a favorite brother who had come home. We studied together. We played duets together, and hoped together for the day of the great concert artists. And then it happened. You injured your right hand. It's hopeless, Clara. A pianist with a crippled hand might career is over before it's even started. Oh, no, you mustn't say that, Robert. You can still compose. Yes, and I'll play your music for you. I will be your hands. Oh, Robert, don't laugh at me. I'm not. You strange, remarkable child. It was true I was a child. And yet at 13, I played the first public performance of your first symphony. The years passed, and you were lost in your work writing music and articles about music. You were a magazine editor now, and I thought you had forgotten about Clara. And then one day you came to see me. You had a new composition for me to play. It's because the girl who inspired it is so much more love. Express in music what Byron said in poetry. She walks in beauty like the night of cloudless climbs and starry skies and all that's best of dark and bright. Have I offended you? No. But these tears, I have shocked you. You still think of me as an older brother. I have no right to speak to you of love. No right? Someone else? Oh, my darling, you have every right. I prayed that I might grow up in time for you. Clara? My Clara. So confident, Robert, that everything would be all right. We would wait until I was 18, and then you would go to my father and tell him of our love. And when you did go to him, on that night, two years later, I waited outside the parlor door, trembling with excitement and hope. Yes, Papa? Would you come in here, please? Papa, where is Robert? He's gone. I told him he need not stay. I would explain my position to you. You quarrel. Clara, I am your father and I am your teacher. Therefore I have a double duty. I must see that my daughter marries a man worthy of her. And I must be sure that my pupil does not throw away the great talent which I have helped to develop. But, Father, you've always liked Robert. You've told me how fond you were of him. He's one of my pupils as a composer. But as my son-in-law, Robert Schumann, is impossible. You hear impossible. The possible thought for me was that our love should be denied.  When I stole out of the house to meet you, we walked hand in hand across the Augustus Plats and through the park. We pretended to listen to the band concert. But we heard only the crying in our hearts. Recognize the music, Clara? They are playing my drama, right? Robert, I've made up my mind. No, my dear, don't say it. I'm going to run away, Robert. We'll be married. We can't, Clara. The law will not permit it. Your father must give his consent to the marriage. Someday he shall. But how can we be sure? He thinks no man is good enough for me. If I were your father, perhaps I should think the same. Clara, there's only one way. I must prove myself to your father. It'll take time, a year, perhaps two years. Oh, Robert. I'll do it, Clara. But I'll have to leave Leipzig and go where there's opportunity for me. To Vienna? Vienna, yes. For nine years you've been coming into my life and then going away. Never again, my darling. With love there is no distance that can separate. No time that can wither. There is only love. Always we shall be together, Clara. So much from Vienna, my dear. But Vienna was not ready for you. Events were working against us even more than you realized. Your letters told me of defeats and my answers told you of successes which were even more dangerous. All Leipzig was talking of my concerts. My father counted every triumph of his daughter as another proof that we should not marry. And when you finally came back to Leipzig and saw my father again, I knew his answer even before you told me. He was furious with me, Clara. There's nothing I can say to him. It's hopeless. No, I won't believe it. He can't keep it apart. But he has, my dear. For the past four years, the law says he can.  It can, Clara. It can do that. Well, it can. Well, then why shouldn't it? Clara, I studied to be an attorney at Heidelberg. I know how unpleasant trials can be. Trial? I would have to sue your father. I would have to take him into court and make him state his objections to our marriage. All the judge would soon see how unreasonable and foolish your father has been. But... You don't want to bring my name into court. That's it, isn't it? Darling, your name is known all over Germany. Leipzig is proud of you. But pride can turn to anger and accusation. Yes. People would say I'm an ungrateful daughter. But it's not true. I love my father and I love you. He's given me a career, but there's more to that than life. My life is you. Oh, dearest. Robert, I want you to go to court. Thank you, Clara. To risk so much, your father may never forgive you. Even if he never speaks to me again, I have no choice. Whatever I lose, my home, my father, my music, I still gain everything, darling, because I'll have you. Well, did you receive an unexpected valentine? I hope you did, because there's nothing like the knowledge that someone thought of you to cast a sunny glow over a day in February. Over any day in any month, for that matter. And when it's so easy to show our thoughtfulness, isn't it a shame we don't do so more often? For instance, there are hallmark cards to send when you haven't had time to write a letter, when you want to tell someone you miss them, or when you simply want to say, hello, how are you? In fact, a hallmark card turns any day into something special for the person receiving it. In only a few minutes, you can find the hallmark card that best expresses your thoughts. That's because hallmark cards are designed to say what you want to say, just the way you want to say it. And also because hallmark cards are sold in stores that have been carefully selected, where you will find stocks well arranged and easy to find displays, and where you are assured of quick and friendly service. So remember, there's a good reason why people everywhere look for that familiar hallmark on the back of any card they send or receive.  Now back to James Hilton and the second act of the story of Clara and Robert Schumann, starring Joan Fontaine. And so it is now with Clara Schumann. While the concert hall still echoes with applause, she relaxes quietly in her dressing room backstage. She has much to remember, and the memories come one after the other without effort, like notes of an old melody. I know how it grieved you, Robert, to be in conflict with my father. It was painful for you to see your old teacher stand there in court, to his hear is angry, and yet his aesthetic argument against our marriage. But the sorrow which you and I felt for that scene was erased by the judge's verdict. After five long years of waiting and longing, we were free to marry. It was on the very eve of my 21st birthday that we knelt at the altar of the church at Schoenfeld and joined our two lives forever. How you wrote music as you had never before, and I played it for you and for the people of Leipzig. Our first child was born, and then I returned again to the concert hall to play a joint recital with Franz Liszt. I still remember that long, hard rehearsal, and when it was over, Liszt walked across the stage to my piano. He stared down at me with those intense, dark eyes. But, Amsterdam, you and I have discovered a great secret. Oh, have we? I am the greatest janitor to us all over Europe. The critics say this, the public says this, and I agree naturally. But now, we have this secret. But what secret, here, Liszt? But the critics and the public go wrong. You and I are both the greatest. Oh, you are very kind, here, Liszt. Not kind, my girl. Only amaze. Tell your Robert that he must compose great works for your great... And the last year he's written over a hundred songs, and now he's working on a piano concerto and a symphony. A hundred songs, a concerto, a symphony? Where does he find such inspiration in? But I'm a fool to ask that. When here, she sits before me. Songs, symphonies, quartets, creos, the nutters, they flowed from your pen without stopping. You took success lightly for yourself and valued it only when it could help others. Clara, my dear, this evening I'm going to bring home a young friend of mine. He needs encouragement. I'm writing a magazine article about him. Oh, I'd love to meet him, dear. What's his name? You mark my words, Clara. One day his music will conquer all Europe. Darling, his name? Oh, Johannes Brahms. Tell the children they can stay up to meet him. The children. How much they meant to you. The serious, quiet Robert Schumann who threw away his dignity to play horse and rider with them or to leave them around the house in solemn parade. And in the evenings you would sit with one of the children in your lap while I played a lullaby. Mama. Yes, Julie? Did papa write that music just for us? For Marie and Elise and Enid? No, dear. You wrote it long before any of you were born. It's for all children everywhere. Clara, do you remember? I was thinking of it now. That night we listened to the band play in the park. I told you I was going to Vienna. And you were so frightened. Do you remember what I told you? With love there is no distance that can separate. There is no time that can weather. Oh, Robert. She's fallen asleep. How swiftly the years slip past when two people are happy. It seemed as if no cloud could darken the sky. But even happiness can be blind. But I thought you were asleep. Almost done. And I can't stop it. I can't. Darling, what's wrong? I keep hearing it day and night, day and night. I had shrieks with the sound of it. Always the same note. Dream fatigue. What else did he say? Until you're completely recovered, then it's been no more music.  No more music. It was like forbidding a bird to sing or an eagle to fly. Yet with rest, recovery did come. But only for a time. He's going to take you to the sanatorium. I'm ready. I want a rest. I'm coming with you, darling. I've canceled my recital. No, no. You must not.  You must keep my music alive until... until we can be together again. Promise me you will, Clara. Promise me. I promise, Robert. Until we can be together again. Shuman, if it is at all possible for you to leave London, I suggest that you come immediately to the sanatorium while there is still time. Is it night or is it only my eyes, the sky? Clear. Without a single cloud. The stars. You rest your head on my shoulder and you can watch them through the window. We've watched them so often together, haven't we? They never change, still so lovely. She walks in beauty like the night of cloudless climbs. Hey, sky. Shuman, and now what can I do for you? Yeah, Gerhard. I would like you to arrange another concert tour for me. Another? Forgive me, but so soon... Robert would have wished it. He didn't live to see his music, understood and loved as it should be. I want to take his work to every capital in Europe to play it in cities and villages. So long as his music sings in the hearts of men, Robert Shuman will never die. Then the tour will be arranged. I am honoured to serve such a magnificent artist and a magnificent woman. Art is long, Robert, and life is short. And now my work is almost done. Your music does sing in the hearts of men everywhere, as it has sung in mine through all these years. Madame Shuman. Yes, Gerhard. The audience will not let you go. Would you perhaps one more encore? Very well. May I make a suggestion, Madame Shuman? They have been calling for trauma. The audience is never tired of hearing you play it. Perhaps because it means so much to me, Gerhard. So very much. A few moments ago I made the statement that it's really very easy for all of us to show our thoughtfulness and appreciation of others, that the speed and convenience with which you can buy hallmark cards make it easy. You'll find another help to thoughtfulness if you get in the habit of carrying your hallmark date book with you and using it all during the year. If you haven't already received your date book present from the store where you buy hallmark cards, drop in tomorrow and ask for one. Your store will be grabbed to give you one whether you make a purchase or not. And as there is room for the names and addresses of all your friends in this handy little book, you'll find yourself referring to it all during the year, whenever you want to show your thoughtfulness to your friends. Another way to show your thoughtfulness is make sure the cards you send have that familiar hallmark on the back, for then your friends will know who cared enough to send the very best. Here again is James Hilton. It was certainly good to have you with us this evening, Joan, and thank you for a beautiful portrayal of Clara Schumann. Oh, I'm glad you liked it, Jimmy. I always enjoy the roles you ask me to play on a hallmark playhouse. How do you manage to get such interesting stories week after week? Oh, the world's full of interesting and courageous people, Joan, and to tell stories about them makes us especially happy because sometimes they can give us new heart of our own problems. New heart? Oh, I like that. No wonder I enjoy hallmark playhouse. It's like receiving an unexpected hallmark card from a friend.  Tell me, Jimmy, what are you having on hallmark playhouse next week? Next week on the eve of George Washington's birthday, we shall dramatize an exciting novel of the revolutionary days, Powder Mission, by Herbert E. Stover, and as our star, we shall be happy to have Barry Sullivan. Our hallmark playhouse is every Thursday. Our producer-director is Bill Gay. Our music is composed and conducted by David Rose, and our story tonight was written by Leonard St. Clair. Until next Thursday then, this is James Hilton saying, good night. And stores that have been carefully selected to give you expert and friendly service. Remember a hallmark card when you will carry enough to send the very best. Joan Fontaine will soon be seen in the Paramount picture of something to live for. The role of Robert Schumann was played tonight by Whitfield Conner, Ted DeCorsi was Professor Vick, Joseph Kearns was Gearhart, Ted Osburn Franslis, and a little girl was played by Kulet MacMahon. Every Sunday afternoon on television, hallmark cards present Sarah Churchill, who brings you the story of interesting people on the Hallmark Hall of Fame. Consult your local newspaper for time and station. This is Frank Goss saying, good night to you all until next week at the same time. When hallmark playhouse returns to Barry Sullivan in Herbert Eastover's powder mission, and the week following Harriet Fitz Ryan's Mother of the Groom starring Rue Posse, and the week after that Rupert Hughes' Man Without a Home on the Hallmark Playhouse. This is KMBC, Kansas City, Missouri.


What's good YouTube? It's your boy Chihuahua, back with y'all again with another art video man. If you're new to this channel, go ahead and hit that like button, comment, subscribe, make sure you click, post notifications so you'll be notified anytime you put y'all some heat. In today's video, I will be teaching you guys how to become better free hand artists. So without further ado, let's jump right into this video. Okay, the main thing you need to know to become better at it is no secret, bro. All you gotta do is practice. The more time you put into it, over time, you will get better. You know what I'm saying? So, but I'm gonna show you some good ways that you know what I'm saying? The practice, you know what I'm saying? So, let me go ahead and set my little pressure on my pressure. Anytime you're trying to, trying to goddamn learn how to draw, what you want to do is you don't want to just go into it, just automatically draw it. You want to start out with a sketch. A sketch is like a blueprint. You know what I'm saying? You know, when somebody building a house, they don't just go put bricks down and stuff like that. At first, they draw out a plan.  So what I like to do is I like to find me a nice bright color so I can make me a sketch of what I'm gonna draw and y'all see the picture that I'm looking at. You know what I'm saying? I put it on the side so y'all can see. So, what I'm gonna do is I'm gonna just back down, try to make the shapes of what I'm seeing. To see everything is, it's like the different shapes you put together. You know what I'm saying?  You know what I'm saying? Meaning you're gonna have a hard time erasing it because you're moving so slow you don't got attached to what you just put down. So that's what I like to do. When I'm making a rough sketch, I like to try to move fast because I don't even know if I'm gonna keep. Maybe I need to change something so let me just go and just try to move quick and then switch something up. My sketch is to be real light. The thing about a sketch, you can take as long as you need, as long as you get it right. As long as the picture looks perfect at the end, that's all that matter. So if this take all day to get right, take all day, man. Just don't be in a rush to get finished. Take your time until you perfect it. Another thing about sketching too, you need to just find time, some spare time to work on it a lot. Every time you get some free time, find you a picture. It can be just go to Google and type in like model photos and then just pull up a picture and start practicing. Now I promise like if you try to do that like every day for like a year, at the end of the year you're gonna see so much progress in your work. You're gonna be like, dang man. Try to practice for a full year.  It's got the eye way too close. Like putting together a little closer. How you able to make it look so easy by doing stuff like this, bro? Taking the time out practice. It's just like going to the gym. Like if I wanted to play sports, you got to really go work out and really be in the gym so you can perform better. So I say a lot of people always ask me, man, how you get? Oh, what should I do to get better at shading? You got to do it a lot. You got to be terrible a lot to get good at something. So get used to being terrible before you get good. You know what I'm saying? But I understand everything. Everything is a process. I really like sketching because you really get the I can literally sit on this all day until I get it where I need it to be. You know what I'm saying? So while you sketching, while you're making a sketch, if you practicing, don't hurry up and try to rush to get to doing the final line work. Stay on that sketch as long as you can until you finally got everything looking proportionately great. You know what I'm saying? On your picture. So don't just try to rush. If you need a race a million times to get one line right, do it. You know what I'm saying? Because at the end of the day, you're just trying to make the best picture you can possibly make. That's the goal. Trying to make some great artwork. Think about sketching too. Every detail makes a difference.  That's how art is. You probably can draw amazing pictures now. Like if you take your time, you know what I'm saying? It'll probably take you longer than me if you're just like not really perfect at your craft yet. But I promise you if you put more time into making changes and you're racing and getting every little piece right, you can make an amazing picture. You see what I'm doing? If I mess up somewhere, I go back. I look at some of my switches. I switch it. I keep changing. I keep changing things until I finally got it looking like the picture I'm trying to copy. So practice makes perfect. So try to get as much practice as you can. Find random photos online. Just type in model pictures and just grab one each day. Spend like never know how. Just make time for it each day. I don't know how much time you can make for it. So anything will be good. Any practice will be good. Get better at this. You gotta give it some attention, man. Look closer in on how. Sometimes the eyes, it's the windows to the soul. So sometimes get these eyes on point. It'll make a difference too in the picture. Or making it look like what you're trying to draw. I'm paying close attention to detail my eye. This side, I need a better free hand. But see, that's why you practice. I'm gonna do some more practicing. You know what I'm saying? But make sure you don't do like me. Don't stop where I stop. Get it perfect. If you need to switch something around, do the changes. Make the changes you need to make. Get it how you needed to look. Thank y'all for watching. Make sure you stay tuned when he comes soon. And I'm out there dying.


Now, Roma Wines, R-O-M-A, made in California for enjoyment throughout the world. Roma Wines, present. Suspense. Tonight, Roma Wines bring you Mr. Paul Henry, a star of the Angel of Death, a suspense play produced, edited and directed for Roma Wines by William Spear. Suspense, Radio's Outstanding Theater of Thrills, is presented for your enjoyment by Roma Wines. That's R-O-M-A, Roma Wines. Those excellent California wines that can add so much pleasantness to the way you live, to your happiness and entertaining guests, to your enjoyment of everyday meals. Yes, right now, a glass full would be very pleasant, as Roma Wines bring you Mr. Paul Henry, in a remarkable tale of... Suspense. December 31st, New Year's Eve. I shall identify myself as John Forsythe, my true name, as I have no reason to fear it's being known or to assume one of a different character. My early life has no place in this narrative, safe only to point out with the utmost objectivity that I've always been possessed since my tenderest youth of extraordinary intellectual powers. As witness, my acquisition at the age of 16, of degrees from not one, but three of the leading universities of Europe, where, despite my British nativity, I spent my formative years. But this fact has no special significance, other than as it applies to those events which were set in motion on another New Year's Eve, in London, 15 years ago. For it was on that evening, as I had planned some weeks before it should be, that I stood outside a door and listened for confirmation of the relationship I knew existed between my best friend and my wife. Darling, darling, darling. No, no, no, it's all right. Pam, it's all over now. Yes. Are you happy? Yes. Now that we've decided, yes. Almost for the first time since I can remember. I know, darling, and I suppose we should feel sorry for him, but I can't, not after the way he's treated you. Raymond, what do you suppose he'll do? It doesn't matter, darling. Tomorrow we'll be on the Atlantic Ocean and within a month we'll be on my uncle's plantation in Brazil where he couldn't find us if he looked for a hundred years. No, I suppose it doesn't. Now how long will it take you to pack? Oh, an hour. Well, I ought to be back by then. I've just got to pick up the tickets and join a few things. All right, hurry, darling. I will. Goodbye, darling. Goodbye. Good evening, my dear. John! Why? What's the matter, Pamela? You look as though you'd seen a ghost. Why, nothing. You startled me, that's all. You said you were going out of town for the holidays and you don't usually come in by the back door. You needn't be alarmed. I shall be only a moment. I, uh, forgot something. Can I get it for you? Your anxiety for my every wish is touching. But no, thank you. By the way, Pamela, have you any last words? Any what? We may not see each other for a while, you know. What are you talking about, John? What's the matter with you?  Oh, John, please. Pamela, where do you suppose we shall all be, say, within the month? Does it really matter so much? No, no. I suppose it does not. Within the month, I was on trial for their murder. You are Henry Jenkins, prepared of the crown and lion, number 17, Buxton Street. I'm Gatwin, sir. I am. Henry Jenkins, so long... Now, uh, will you kindly repeat the word spoken by the prisoner in the dock while in your place of business several weeks ago? Yes, sir. Well, about two weeks ago one night, Mr. Forsythe there, who's a steady customer of mine, sir. Although he's not what you call a sociable man. Yes, yes, yes, yes. Well, sir, all me other customers had gone home and I was asking Mr. Forsythe to leave, uh, also, just so I could close up my shadows, you know. When all of a sudden he looks up at me and he whispers kind of horse-like, you know. Jenkins, I did it. I finally did it. Well, not knowing what he did, I naturally asked him, uh, what he did. And, uh, what did the prisoner tell you, Mr. Jenkins? He said, sir, wanting me... Wanting me to keep it quiet, I found them together and I killed them. And then he laughs in a crazy way in ads and Jenkins. I hid the bodies where no one will ever find them. That's what he said, sir. So help me, it is! I saw him burning what looked to be a lot of bloody clothes in the furnace it was and he didn't try to hide them either. Just stared at me kind of odd-like and went right on as brazen as you please he did. He told me he wasn't worried at all. He said the two of them would never get away together, except if they are dead. I heard him say it on the stair-land in one night and several other times in their rooms.  I warn you. The court feels that it is its duty at this time, again to remind the prisoner that he has so far made nor allowed to be made by counsel in his defence no cross-examination of witnesses nor a bottle to the charges made by the prosecution of any kind and that this attitude can only result adversely to his cause. The prisoner is therefore once more given opportunity at this time to make such a bottle. Does the prisoner wish to do so? No, Your Lordship. I do not. Does the prisoner wish to make any statement of any nature whatsoever in his defence? I should merely like to ask the prosecution one question, Your Lordship. Yes? What is it? Has the prosecution found the bodies? Well, the prisoner wishes to know if the prosecution has yet produced the bodies of the alleged victims of the crime for which he is on trial. Well, no, Your Lordship. We have not. That is all.  Every faculty of my intelligence revolted against such a thought and so for me the gambler's risk was needless. So I had planned it. It was therefore without fear a question that I stood before the court to hear the verdict, which in all the writing of it I had contrived against myself. Order! Order! John Forsythe. The court has given most careful consideration to the fact that the bodies of the named victims have not been presented to this court as due evidence and assurity of murder, a fact which admittedly must alter the circumstances of guilt. But this crown court, no matter how deeply it desires to aid you, cannot but recognise the fact that you have allowed every shred of evidence and element to point to you as a cold, bloody pillar. Under such circumstances, questionable, though they may be, I can do only as the King's law directs me to do. Tempered with the mercy of His Majesty's court. I hereby sentence you to no more than twenty and no less than ten years at hard labour for the suspected and willful murders of your wife, one Pamela Felice Forsythe and one Raymond Elton Tillotson, and may God protect the crown and the jurisprudence of this court of His Royal Majesty. Ten to twenty years. It was perhaps a bit more than I expected, but I was content. And it may be that there was even the trace of a smile upon my lips as I left the courtroom. Certainly it was justified if only by the looks of awe and admiration turned in my direction by the spectators. Clearly they recognised my genius and I knew they were thinking of the countless lesser men who had failed in their efforts to hide even one dead body. Whereas I, apparently without effort, had successfully hidden two. Between the acts of suspense, this is Truman Bradley for Roma Wines. With the holiday excitement over, most of us are glad to enjoy evenings at home again, taking it easy and economising. What a perfect time to serve Roma California sherry. Yes, glorious gold and amber Roma sherry adds so much to happy hours at home, yet costs so very little. More Americans every day make Roma sherry first call for dinner. You'll find Roma sherry ideal for entertaining too, delicious anytime. For Roma sherry is a happy mellow wine with tempting fragrance, satisfying natural sweetness, and superb nut-like taste. Roma sherry, like all Roma wine, is a true wine, unvaryingly good always, crushed from choicest grapes, grown in California's finest vineyards, then unhurriedly guided to tempting perfection by Roma's ancient winemaking skill, bottled at the winery. Get Roma sherry tomorrow, now selling at lowest prices in years. Insist on Roma, R-O-M-A, Roma wine for uniformly fine quality at low cost. Remember, more Americans enjoy Roma than any other wine. And now Roma wines bring back to our Hollywood soundstage Paul Henry, Das John Forsythe, in The Angel of Death, a play well calculated to keep you in suspense. It was thus that I began my prison term, and my association with William Waters, a shallow-phased, ill-favored little man who was to be my chief source of amusement in mental exercise for a long time to come, and to illustrate still further the inevitable triumph of the higher intellect over all obstacles and surroundings. So, you're the great John Forsythe, eh? You've heard of me, then? Not half, I haven't. The luckiest beggar that ever cheated the Angman. Luck? There is no such thing as luck. Now? Now is it your sitting here safe and sound, and out as free as air in 15 or 20 years, instead of stretching your neck at the end of a rope, eh? I'm here because I choose to be here. That is all. Because you choose to be... Oh, oh, oh! Tell me, Forsythe, just between the two of us, how did you do it? By using my brains. And has many another tried that before and been caught up with? Simply because they did not really have any brains to start with. No, it's luck, I'll tell you. Bad luck, like mine.  If you wish to call it that, why not? It was like what happened to you in a way. The sweetheart, Agnes, her name was, with the biggest, bluest eyes, or the prettiest little thing you'd ever hope to see.  Hard didn't mean to. The usual, you know. I had caught her dead to rights, but she laughed at me. That was the trouble. Threw it in my face, she did. Next thing I knew was something snapped. When the head cleared, there I was, sitting on the floor beside her, crying like a baby. And her line there with her pretty blue eyes, tearing out of her head. Her pretty mouth all twisted. Red marks there on her throat. The marks are the two very ends where I'd strangled the life out of her. You weren't unlucky.  You killed her without planning it. And what did you do with the body? Cemented her into the wall of the cellar. And the bloke next door had a gas heater. Exploded and blew out the old, ruddy wall between us it did. The time I got home, there was firemen and bobbies all over the place. And there was Agnes. What was left of her? Line right out in the middle of the cellar floor for all the world to see. The truly intelligent man foresees every possibility and guards against it. Who could foresee a thing like that? I could. I stand before you as the living proof of it. In 10 or 15 years I shall be three because I'm intelligent.  Pretty clever, aren't you? Now just about everything there is to know, don't you? No, no, no. Not everything. But quite a lot of things. For instance, I know something about that cough of yours. Oh, what about it? The color of your skin. The look about your eyes, the way you breathe. I hope you're not afraid to die, Waters. Rubbish. What are you talking about? Have you ever heard of retribution, Waters? What? The inevitable fate that pursues and at last destroys the criminal mind. Vengeance, you might call it. Ah, rot. You don't think anything's going to happen to you or me, do you? Not to me, Waters, for the intelligent man foresees and prevents even that. But to you, Waters, most certainly to you. Oh, indeed. I know who's going to do all this. Oh, he's known by various names, Waters. But best known as the Angel of Death. Retribution, the Angel of Death. Observed, wasn't it? But a most purposeful absurdity. For the intellectual stimulus so necessary to remaining mentally alert during the prison years ahead, was here delivered into my hand an experiment and one almost impossible under any other conditions. And William Waters would be my guinea pig. An experiment to determine just how far a man might succeed through sheer superiority of intelligence in breaking down and destroying the mind and the body of another. But a simple power of suggestion. I suggested nothing directly. Nearly a word here, a glance there. Drops of water, wearing away the stone. I've got a fever again tonight. I'm done, John. No, no. A touch, perhaps. But that is all. My head feels hot. Why does that blasted cough, what does it? No, no. You mustn't worry about it. It's every very, very bad for people with your condition to worry. What condition? What condition, John? Why, nothing. People with a cough like yours, people who feel, well, you know, indisposed, that's all. Oh. What's that book you're reading lately? Just a book, a scientific book. And I got from the prison library. What sort of a scientific book? A journal book on medicine, things like that. Well, let me see it. No, no, no. Yeah, give it here. You won't understand. No, please, give it back to me. You wouldn't be interested. You had it opened in this place here, didn't you? This is what you was reading, ain't it? Well, yes, among other things.  You book your losses. You said what I got, John? Chewbacca loses? Oh, don't be silly. There's nothing seriously wrong with you. John, you've got to tell me. You've got to tell me. I don't want to die. You're not going to die. if you take care of yourself why should it come to me I've always been healthy I'm not old yet of course you're not you're just imagining things you're worrying too much that's all what makes you think I'm worried sometimes you know when you're asleep tell me do you ever have dreams what sort of dreams or about the past or you mean you mean about yes you have a dream you see her lying there on the floor with her eyes bulging out of her head and her mouth all twisted her tongue all black and swollen don't stop it stop it stop it he seems somewhat disturbed in his mind this evening guard doctor said we was to try to prevail on him to get out of his bunk tomorrow and get outside get a little exorcism fresh air oh you tell him I what was you too much in about he was just telling me what the doctor said about you oh what well he wants you to stay in your bunk and get plenty of rest the time was drawing near I knew the time for what I had planned as the culmination of my experiment waters was having periods of definite delirium but I waited I waited for them to become more pronounced and then one night when I'd listen to him tossing and muttering for hours in his bunk I crossed over in the darkness no no no wait wait no it ain't time yet to give yet no oh William waters I've come for you William waters she sent me William she sent me with her eyes staring out of her head with her black swollen tongue oh I'm the angel of death quiet you I had to hit him the man is out of his mind he thinks I'm some angel of death or something there you come on up on your feet come on now then waters now what's the matter with you oh you as you what's done this to me I told you it's you it was out of his head it's you what's done it to me I'll see it now come on you're coming on me it was interesting while it lasted and I've always believed that uh given a little more time I could have ended my experiment uh successfully but I had other plans to make now plans for the day when I would be free and at last it came at last I was walking away from the prison gate a free man now began my search it was not difficult it led me at last to Paris to a small apartment where I went tonight December 31st New Year's Eve yes good evening well good evening did you wish to see someone don't you recognize me well I do of course but uh are you a friend of pens I am indeed who is it darling that's a friend of yours dear a friend of both of you John yes in fact your husband my dear and Raymond's best friend 15 years yes you only returned to Paris recently didn't you yes a short time ago and you never knew that I was convicted in sentence to prison for your double murder did you murder oh that was quite as I planned it I knew where you were but the authorities did not John but perhaps you have heard of a curious legal technicality which provides the man cannot be convicted twice for the same crime so you see I've already paid for your murders and now I've come to collect an ancient death put on that gun I then walked calmly from their rooms I made no effort to hide my face my trail or my identity I can now defy every element in life and in law after 15 years I've committed the crimes for which I've already paid my debt to society I shall mail this letter to the police who may give it to the newspapers who whoever wants it although it is now a matter of indifference to me if the world remarks upon my cleverness or my patience for my life is complete no man has ever known such happiness John Forsyth yes yes come in Madam Leclerc I have a letter now ready I wish you to mail for me waters I'm not waters any longer how did you get out they said I was insane so I hadn't been responsible when I killed and then they said I was cured sane again and then they let me out but there was one thing they never knew they never knew who I really was what are you talking about that's why I've come for you John Forsyth me I am the chosen messenger of an eye a power look here water died John Forsyth and the story ends with a newspaper clipping let me read it to you Paris January 1st this gay metropolis spent one of its quietest new years eaves in recent years in all greater Paris there are only two recorded deaths by violence both of which by a strange coincidence occurred within a few yards of each other the first was the fatal shooting by an unknown assailant of an Englishman John Forsyth the second victim unidentified had apparently leaped from a window or roof with the same dwelling occupied by Forsyth police were at a loss to explain a weird black silk robe and cape worn by the man John gave Leclerc concierge of the building alleges to have heard a voice repeating an English phrase I am the angel of death just before the suicidal leap however this can hardly have any bearing on the case since the said phrase was undoubtedly uttered by New Year's revelers in the neighborhood suspense presented by roma wines r o m a made in california for enjoyment throughout the world how much more pleasurable any meal becomes when roma wine is served yes a fine table wine such as roma california burgundy makes any food taste better brings out all the flavor lends romance and friendly companionship to the meal america's famed hostess elsa maxwell says my simple secret for gracious and enjoyable dining is to serve my guests roma burgundy it's so easy to make your meals more delicious more exciting as elsa maxwell does because roma wine costs so little anyone can serve it often compliment your next dinner with the fruity fragrance and appetizing pecan taste of red robust roma burgundy get roma burgundy tomorrow now selling at the lowest prices in years and you get extra saving when you buy roma in the half gallon and gallon size no wine but roma offers you so much for so little insist on roma r o m a roma wine made in california for enjoyment throughout the world paul henry appeared through the courtesy of warner brother studios and will soon be seen in their production devotion next thursday same time roma wines will bring you mr phil terry a star of suspense radios outstanding theater of thrill produced by william spear for the roma wine company of fresno california this is cbs the columbia broadcasting system


Let's solve a question where we have to analyze energy for an oscillator from a data table. For this one we have a block which is attached to an ideal spring which oscillates without friction on a horizontal table. A student makes the following measurements on the block. So we have the measurement of spring constant, mass that is 0.5 kg, amplitude, maximum speed and average speed. What is the maximum energy of the block spring system? And we need to choose one answer out of these four options. As always pause the video and first try this one on your own. Alright, hopefully you have given this a shot. Now first let's try to visualize how this system looks like, how the mass spring system looks like. So we can say that there is a block, there is a spring and we can assume that the surface is horizontal and it's frictionless. And the block, the block oscillates, it oscillates like this. We can say that this position in the middle that is the origin, zero position. So the displacement to the left of it, it's negative displacement to the right of it, it's positive. An amplitude is given to us which is 0.3 meters. So when the block oscillates like this, it goes to a maximum positive displacement and this one is 0.3 meters and then when it goes back, goes back then the maximum negative displacement that is minus 0.3, minus 0.3 meters. Alright, what else do we know? We know the spring constant, we know the constant of this spring. This is 80 Newton per meters and we also know the maximum speed 4 meters per second and the mass of the block which is 0.5. So maximum speed really is achieved when the block crosses the equilibrium position when there is no net force acting on the block, the block moves with a maximum speed when it crosses the zero position, the origin over here, the equilibrium position. Now we need to figure out the maximum energy of this block spring system. So first let's try to think about what all forms of energy are even present. Now the block is moving, there is some velocity, so there must be some kinetic energy and we also see a spring in the system. So there must also be an elastic potential energy. There is a kinetic energy, there is also an elastic potential energy. We need to think about the maximum energy. So both, so maximum kinetic and maximum elastic potential energy. And if we think about the maximum kinetic energy, well kinetic energy was half m v square. So maximum k will be achieved when velocity is maximum and maximum elastic potential energy, this should be achieved. This is really half k x square. This will be achieved when x extension is maximum and extension is maximum at two positions that is at two extreme positions, maximum negative and maximum positive. So x will really be the amplitude, this is the amplitude. So the maximum energy of the block spring system, this is half m v max square plus half k k a square. All right, now let's put in the values. We can take half common, mass is 0.5. So 0.5 into v max square which is 16 4 square plus k is 80 into amplitude square that will be 0.09. a square, this will be 0.09. And when you multiply 80 with 0.09, you get 7.2. So you are adding 7.2 here. 0.5 into 16 that is 8 and 8 plus 7.2 that is 15.2 that is 15.2. Now we're dividing 15.2 with 2, 15.2 divided by 2. So this comes out to be equal to 7.6 joules, 7.6 joules and that is that is the last option option b. You can try more questions from this exercise in the lesson and if you're watching on YouTube, do check out the exercise link which is added in the description.


down one to nothing early taking on Virginia now this was the 10th pitch of the at bat Madison Hockenon follows follows it off of her helmet but she stays at the plate and on pitch 12 she gets a double to left to score a run they put up five in the third now Bemidji at the plate and at Hockenon she gets tripped up that scores a run but she was all right she able to hustle down to second after the loose ball went dribbling away and in the fourth Bemidji down six to five McKenna Quinn hits the blooper to right just out of reach that would score a run and Bemidji they would take both rounds of the double header against Virginia by a score of 12 to 8 and 8 to 7 if you enjoyed this segment of Lakeland news please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland PBS