From Frigid Room Conditions To Frozen Water Pipes, U Of Maine Students Find The Grove Isn't So Hot

The Grove at Orono, Maine

What's it like to attend college in Maine and discover that your apartment is not properly heated--when the calendar says it's January? What's it like to realize the water pipes at your apartment in Maine tend to freeze in winter?

Apparently it isn't much fun because several University of Maine students are considering legal action over these problems, and more, at The Grove apartment complex near the campus in Orono.

Why does this story resonate here in relatively balmy Alabama? The Grove is the banner under which Charlotte-based Campus Crest Communities builds and manages student-apartment complexes near some 40 universities around the country. Campus Crest CEO Ted Rollins belongs to one of the nation's wealthiest families--the folks behind Orkin Pest Control and parent company Rollins Inc. in Atlanta--and showed during an Alabama divorce case styled Rollins v. Rollins that he is willing to use the court system in an abusive fashion.

Are UMaine students about to be on the receiving end of courtroom cheat jobs like the one Sherry Carroll Rollins, Ted's ex wife, experienced here in Shelby County, Alabama? We might soon find out.

Published reports indicate students in Orono have plenty of reasons to be unhappy with the product that Ted Rollins' company turns out. From a Bangor Daily News report in late January:

Residents of The Grove, a new apartment complex that is home to hundreds of University of Maine students, experienced a series of problems last week as a result of the recent cold snap.

Among the inconveniences were power outages due to transformers too small to handle the amount of electricity being consumed, frozen water pipes and frozen sprinkler systems.

Residents pay an average monthly rent of $525 per person, and Campus Crest touts its facilities as featuring "fully loaded living," with amenities not normally found in college dorms. But some UMaine students say the amenities do not always include heat. Consider the experience of Chelsea MacDonald-Coffin, as reported by Maine Campus, the student newspaper:

One day after an interview and a tour of her apartment by Orono town officials, she sent The Maine Campus a photo of her bedroom window. There was a 2-inch-high chunk of ice on its inside, freezing it shut.

MacDonald-Coffin's problems do not end there--and Campus Crest's response to her concerns has been less than reassuring:

When Chelsea MacDonald-Coffin moved into her new apartment in September at The Grove in Orono, she didn’t expect mold in her bathroom.

She said complex officials hired a company to stop the mold by bringing in dehumidifiers. An employee of that company then told her the problem wouldn’t be resolved unless carpeting was redone.

“I brought the issues to a [visiting] corporate representative,” said MacDonald-Coffin, a second-year management student at the University of Maine. “She basically said that I didn’t know what I was talking about.”

William Murphy, Orono code enforcement director, said The Grove met building standards. But residents remain skeptical, especially since the entire complex was constructed in nine months:

The Grove has had problems with heating, electricity and mold that some tenants say is causing health problems. Last month, tenants were plunged in and out of darkness for a week because the heat pumps used in the complex overtaxed its electrical system.

The kinds of problems experienced — especially when winter hit — led tenants and others to believe that Campus Crest, which has about 40 properties nationwide, had built a facility designed for warmer climes. They questioned whether it met building standards for northeastern states such as Maine.

During an interview, Murphy described the permitting and inspection process leading to The Grove’s opening.

According to Murphy, The Grove was designed to the standards of the International Building Code for this climate district.

“It has to be updated for the area. I don’t know if they have something in Florida but let’s use Florida as an example,” he said. “You can’t build the same kind of housing development in Maine that you would in Florida.”

Some tenants say they are considering legal action. From a news report dated February 5:

As of this week, 15 to 20 tenants of the new Orono apartment complex who attend classes at the University of Maine have sought legal assistance on problems ranging from mold and higher than expected overage fees for electricity to substandard construction and staff entering apartments without providing the “reasonable notice” required by state law, according to Sean O’Mara, undergraduate student legal aid attorney.

“I would say most, if not all, do not want to continue their leases,” said O’Mara, who recently brought the Bangor law firm Pelletier & Faircloth into the effort to get the student tenants’ complaints resolved.

“I can say that the number of people trying to get out of their leases with the Grove [has been] much higher than what I’ve seen for Orchard Trails,” another Orono apartment complex largely populated by college students.

What form might legal action take?

“We’re looking at potential civil options for these students right now. I’m not precluding anything in particular,” O’Mara said. He said that he also is exploring potential violations of Maine’s Unfair Trade Practices Act, the state’s basic consumer protection law.

The Unfair Trade Practices Act prohibits businesses from using unfair or deceptive practices and can be enforced by the attorney general or by consumers who actually have lost money because of an unfair trade practice, according to the state attorney general’s website.

Did The Richest Prince In Oil-Soaked Saudi Arabia Play A Pivotal Role In The Don Siegelman Case?

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, the wealthiest man in Saudi Arabia, has made international headlines in recent days by griping about his place on Forbes' latest rankings of the world's billionaires. Sources tell Legal Schnauzer that Alwaleed might soon make news for a far more profound reason: his apparent role in corrupting the United States justice system, especially in the political prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman.

Does that mean Alwaleed is a dreadful human being because he is petty or because he is corrupt--or because he is both?

Let's consider the petty part first. In an article titled "The Richest People on the Planet 2013," Forbes has Alwaleed falling out of his usual place among the world's top 10. The prince, it seems, takes such lists seriously and was deeply offended to find himself ranked in a three-way tie for the 26th spot. From an article at moneynews.com:

Saudi Arabia richest man, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, claims he was short-changed in Forbes’ latest list of the world’s biggest billionaires, but the magazine is standing by its rankings in a nasty spat being played out in public. 

Forbes said unnamed former employees of the prince told the magazine Alwaleed “systematically exaggerates his net worth by several billion dollars.” 

In its article, Forbes said it couldn’t justify an estimate of Alwaleed’s wealth that would exceed $20 billion, a figure that drops him out of the coveted Top Ten list and places him at a more modest Number 28.

Alwaleed is so butt-hurt that he is threatening to take legal action--and one assumes he can afford a squadron of high-priced lawyers:

Alwaleed responded to the diminished Forbes ranking by getting lawyered up — a press release from the Private Office of His Royal Highness said the prince “has retained counsel,” and requested he be removed from the list altogether.

“Prince Alwaleed has taken this step as he felt he could no longer participate in a process which resulted in the use of incorrect data and seemed designed to disadvantage Middle Eastern investors and institutions,” the palace press release stated.

Forbes writer Kerry Dolan, who covers the world’s wealthiest people for the magazine, said Alwaleed’s response is the culmination of “what is now a quarter-century of intermittent lobbying, cajoling and threatening when it comes to his net worth listing.”

The prince apparently is used to getting his way, and that brings us to the corruption portion of our story. Sources tell Legal Schnauzer that Alwaleed might have played a central role in launching a bogus prosecution against Don Siegelman. (Note: Former Republican Congressman Bob Ney, of Ohio, says in a new book that the Siegelman case was "a travesty of justice." Ney served six terms in the U.S. House before being implicated in the Jack Abramoff scandal.)

Why would a Saudi billionaire care about what transpires at a federal courthouse in Montgomery, Alabama? Well, our sources still are connecting the dots, but it's important to keep in mind that Siegelman's co-defendant was Richard Scrushy, former CEO of Birmingham-based HealthSouth corporation.

Here might be the single biggest dot in the tangled Siegelman/Scrushy story: In 2000, HealthSouth signed a deal to manage a 400-bed rehabilitation hospital near Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The Saudi/HealthSouth story got lost in the larger scandal that engulfed Scrushy and other HealthSouth executives at the time, but the management deal left ill feelings in the Kingdom. A February 2004 article from accountingweb.com explains:

The Justice Department is now looking into whether HealthSouth officials offered bribes in an attempt to secure business in Saudi Arabia, which would be a violation of federal laws that prohibit such payments to secure business oversees.

Specifically, federal prosecutors are investigating a deal signed in 2000 by HealthSouth to manage a 400-bed rehabilitative hospital outside of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. HealthSouth, based out of Birmingham, AL, specializes in rehabilitative and surgical clinics and operates nearly 1,700 facilities, mostly in the U.S.

The Justice Department has been investigating fraud within the company that it puts at $2.7 billion, while the company’s own internal figures hover closer to $4.6 billion. Fifteen former executives have already pleaded guilty in the case, including five former chief financial officers. Founder and former chief executive Richard Scrushy has denied wrongdoing and will stand trial on 85 federal charges in August.

Scrushy, of course, was acquitted in the fraud trial, and our sources say that helped fuel Saudi rage about possible under-handed actions connected to the rehab hospital in Riyadh. From accountingweb.com:

The Wall Street Journal reported that HealthSouth issued a press release in 2000 announcing its agreement to manage the Saudi Arabian hospital. In the release, Scrushy said, "HealthSouth is proud to be part of this affiliation, the goal of which is to integrate the highest quality of rehabilitative health care into the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, with its strong cultural beliefs and traditions."

Now investigators are wondering if behind the scenes, kickbacks were offered to secure the deal. According to the Journal, the parties involved in the deal were not available for comment. However, Steven Miles, a lawyer close to the deal is cooperating with prosecutors looking into the matter. Miles is an expert in Saudi Arabian businesses at the Washington office of Baker Botts, the Journal reported.

What does all of this have to do with Don Siegelman, who currently resides at a federal prison in Oakdale, Louisiana, after being convicted of "crimes" that do not even exist in the U.S. code? We are still piecing together that part of the story. But Americans who care about the integrity of our justice system would be wise to learn more about a HealthSouth management deal that went sour in the Arabian desert.

(To be continued)

Paula Poskon Threatens A Wall Street Cover Up On Her Comments About Ted Rollins' Criminal History

Paula Poskon

A Wall Street analyst threatened to lie about comments she made to Legal Schnauzer regarding the criminal history of Campus Crest Communities CEO Ted Rollins.

Paula Poskon serves as an analyst for Robert W. Baird and Company, one of the underwriters for Campus Crest Communities'  $380-million Wall Street IPO. When I told Poskon in an interview that Ted Rollins's background included a conviction for assault on his 16-year-old stepson and a social services investigation for possible child sexual abuse, she audibly gasped and said, "Oh, my God, I wasn't aware of any of that." After stating that she would conduct research on the matter, Poskon stated that investors would find such matters "very concerning," especially because Campus Crest's target market, as a developer of student housing near college campuses, is young people.

In a follow up conversation, Poskon was adamant that I should not use her comments and even threatened to lie about what she had said in a tape-recorded phone conversation. (See first video at the end of this post.) Here is part of our exchange:

PP: But I’m not in position to comment on what you know. . . . To quote me specifically about Mr. Rollins or Campus Crest, in the context of his personal life . . . I don’t know. I can’t comment on something I don’t know about. 

RS: You did comment, though, on how investors might see this. We talked about the fact it involved young people, and that’s relevant. It was on the record, and I’m going to use it. 

PP: I think that’s very unfortunate. If I get calls on it, I will dispute that.

What does it say about "Wall Street values" when a prominent analyst, one who is quoted in major newspapers and appears on cable news programs, threatens to lie about comments she made on the record?

Poskon proceeded to claim I had not properly identified myself when arranging the interview--even though I gave her my name, my location, my background as a journalist who writes at a blog and several national Web sites, and identified the general subject matter. My response to that was simple:

RS: I said right up front that I’m a journalist, a reporter. It’s a story I’m reporting on, and your insights are important.

In so many words, Poskon was saying that she never would have agreed to the interview if she had known it was with a real journalist who might ask something other than softball questions.

It soon became clear that the "research" Poskon had promised to conduct involved calling Ted Rollins or someone close to him and allowing them to intimidate her. That's because she labeled my reporting as "personal," which is a charge I've heard before from Rollins associates--even though I have no idea what it's supposed to mean, and apparently, Paula Poskon doesn't know either.

Was Dan Rather's reporting on the Nixon administration "personal"? Heck, I don't know, but it changed history. Was Sara Ganim's reporting "personal" when she broke the Jerry Sandusky scandal at Penn State? Again, I have no idea, but she exposed one of the worst cases of child sexual abuse in our nation's history.

You can hear the conclusion to my conversation with Paula Poskon in the second video below. But for now, let's consider this question: Is my reporting on Ted Rollins personal? It might be, in the context that the Rollins v. Rollins divorce case, which launched my inquiry, took place in Shelby County--in the same jurisdiction where I live, in the same court where I've experienced the kind of judicial corruption that has been heaped on Sherry Carroll Rollins and her two daughters.

When Sherry Rollins contacted me about possible wrongdoing in her Shelby County divorce case, it resonated with me. I had been in that courthouse, and I know how some litigants can be railroaded there. I didn't write about Rollins v. Rollins until I had conducted extensive research to confirm Ms. Rollins' story. If that makes my reporting "personal," then I would say journalism needs more personal reporting like it.

Here is part of my exchange on this topic with Paula Poskon:

PP: From what you’ve said and the postings you sent, your writings sound extremely personal, not objective at all. I don’t know why that might be; I'm not making value judgments about what happened to you in the past. From my perspective, a total stranger . . . , your writing does not appear to be objective, it's very personal. . . . Once I saw that, it made me very concerned for your motives about wanting to quote me. That's why I respectfully ask you not to quote me with respect to Campus Crest or Ted Rollins. 

RS: I respect the request, but it’s going to be denied. I’m going to move forward with my reporting. . . . I can tell you there is nothing personal about my reporting on Ted Rollins. I've never met the man . . . 

PP: It appears to me that you have very strong opinions about this person, that I think you were calling for some substantiation, and I can’t provide it.

RS: I don’t need substantiation. I wanted to know how people in the investment world view this sort of thing, and that’s what we discussed . . .

PP: In hypothetical terms. The way I characterized it was in hypothetical terms.

RS: Well, I don’t know if it was hypothetical or not. I asked you specifically about Ted Rollins, and you said it was a concern that this involved young people.

Flawed Drug Arrests Of Two Standout Players Damage Postseason Dreams For One Basketball Team

Sheldon Cooley

For college basketball fans, conference tournaments begin this week, and that means "March Madness" officially has arrived. Better yet, it means the NCAA men's basketball tournament--the best event in all of sports, IMHO--is just around the corner.

Thanks largely to the actions of incompetent law-enforcement officials, however, one of my favorite teams has almost no chance to make noise in the postseason this year.

We are talking about East Tennessee State University (ETSU), which generally has been among the top two or three teams in the Atlantic Sun Conference over the past eight years or so. The Bucs were picked toward the middle of the pack this season, but they still figured to be a dangerous team once the A-Sun Tournament rolled around.

Any hopes for the 2012-13 ETSU team, however, pretty much ended last November when senior guards Marcus Dubose and Sheldon Cooley were arrested on drug charges and dismissed from the team. But then, as the season was winding down, we learned that the charges against Cooley had been dropped. And the charges against Dubose look shaky because of a questionable seizure that led to the firing of a university postal employee.

In the case of Cooley, prosecutors pretty much wound up saying, "Oops, our bad. We didn't have a case against you." In the case of Dubose, prosecutors seem to be saying, "Yes, a guy in the post office screwed up big time by opening a package that was addressed to you--and that presents slight constitutional problems. But we still hope to bring a case. Would you mind pleading guilty to something . . . anything?"

What's the fallout from all of this? Well, Sheldon Cooley had started for much of his career and was seen as ETSU's best all-around player. Dubose, who played for two seasons at a junior college in California, was ETSU's top returning scorer and best outside shooter.

The 2012-13 Bucs were not expected to be a powerhouse because of an inexperienced front court--and that problem became worse when 6-8 senior center Lukas Poderis went down for the year with a torn Achilles tendon in a preseason scrimmage. But a veteran backcourt, led by Cooley and Dubose, was expected to make ETSU a tough, competitive outfit.

So what happened? With Cooley and Dubose gone two games into the season, ETSU got off to its worst start in 37 years. The Bucs finished the regular season with a 10-21 record and are expected to make a quick exit when the A-Sun Tournament begins today in Macon, Georgia. ETSU opens play at 1:30 p.m. CST tomorrow as the No. 6 seed, facing No. 3 Stetson. The host school, Mercer, is the No. 1 seed and a solid favorite to win the title and the league's automatic bid to the NCAA Tournament.

Why does this matter to me? I grew up in Missouri and have lived for 30-plus years in Alabama. Why do I care about a school that is so far on Tennessee's outskirts that it's almost in Virginia?

Well, that's a long story. ETSU's coach is Murry Bartow, and I have known him since the late 1970s, when he was the starting point guard at Berry High School and I was a rookie sportswriter, fresh out of college, at the Birmingham Post-Herald. Murry's father, the late Gene Bartow, was the Hall of Fame coach who started the athletics program at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), the school where I would go on to work as an editor for almost 20 years.

If I get hit by a bus tomorrow, I will go to the Great Beyond knowing that Gene Bartow was one of my all-time favorite humans--and the Bartows, as a group, were one of my all-time favorite families. I've gotten to know probably a dozen or so members of the extended clan--and maybe it's because we share Missouri roots--but I've always found them to be thoroughly likable, decent people. And that includes my friend, Murry. (As for those Missouri roots, Gene Bartow and his wife, Ruth, are from the small Show-Me towns of Browning and Galt, respectively. Murry was born in Warrensburg, Mo., home to Central Missouri State and one of the early stops on his father's coaching tour.)

Here's another reason I pull for ETSU: Murry Bartow started his head coaching career by following in his father's sizable footsteps at UAB. It was a thankless, almost impossible task, but Murry did a solid job. His first three Blazer teams reached postseason tournaments, and the program was on an uptick until a series of season-ending injuries to key players caused his record to level out.

Despite playing with a short-handed roster, Murry had only one losing season. And over six seasons, he had the third best record in Conference USA. That league has been watered down in an era of conference re-alignment. But when Murry was at UAB, his competitors included Louisville, Cincinnati, Marquette, Memphis, Charlotte, DePaul, and St. Louis.

How good was Conference USA back then? There is a good chance that six of the seven teams mentioned above will make this year's NCAA Tournament. UAB had one of the smallest budgets for men's basketball in the league, but only Cincinnati and Charlotte had better records during Murry's tenure.

Did UAB and its administration, led then by President W. Ann Reynolds, appreciate his efforts? Not exactly. Reynolds called Murry at home one night to promise that his job was safe, and about one month later, allowed him to be forced out by a buffoonish athletics director named Herman Frazier.

Marcus Dubose

Can I identify with that situation? Six years after Murry's exit, Carol Garrison (Reynolds' successor as president) allowed various corrupt forces to cheat me out of my job because of the reporting--on matters of public concern--at this blog. As regular readers know, tape-recorded evidence proves I was targeted at UAB because of my reporting on the political prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman. I know, from hard-earned experience, what it's like to have a job pulled out from under you.

(Note: UAB does not deserve fair treatment, but I will provide it anyway. Technically, the university did not cheat Murry Bartow out of his job. Coaches tend to work on contracts, and according to press reports, the university fulfilled its financial duty after letting Murry go with one year left on his deal. College coaching is a famously unstable profession, and even though Murry Bartow did a solid job in a brutal conference and did not deserve to be forced out, the university was on solid legal ground in letting him go--as long as it met contractual obligations. I, however, was not a contract employee, and my termination was about as ugly as it gets--filled with age and gender discrimination, blatant First Amendment violations, tortious interference, and more.)

My concern now is that Murry Bartow might be on shaky footing at ETSU--and I don't much like seeing my friends get canned. That's especially true when incompetent law-enforcement officials, to a great extent, caused the problem.

Consider the charges against Sheldon Cooley and Marcus Dubose. Here is how the Johnson City Press described them:

Dubose was charged with possession of schedule VI drugs for resale after arriving to pick up [a package at the post office]. He and Cooley, his roommate, were also charged with possession of drug paraphernalia when agents found scales commonly used to weigh marijuana in their on-campus apartment.

What do we learn from that? Sheldon Cooley faced only one charge, and it was based on the fact that scales were found in his apartment, which he shared with someone else. According to law enforcement, scales are commonly used for measuring drugs prior to sale. But last time I checked, scales can be used for a lot of things--most of which are not illegal. And based on press reports, we have no proof that the scales belonged to Cooley or that he ever used them for anything related to drugs.

Dubose's actions, on the other hand, seem more dubious. One package addressed to him reportedly contained marijuana; another reportedly contained $10,000. But how did law enforcement come to know that? Because a postal employee unlawfully opened one of the packages.

Is it possible that Cooley and Dubose were up to no good? Yes, it is. But the case against Cooley already has fallen apart. And it's hard to imagine the case against Dubose holding up in light of Fourth Amendment protections against illegal search and seizure. The performance of police and prosecutors in Johnson City, Tennessee, would have to improve dramatically in order to earn a comparison to the Keystone Kops.

Cooley and Dubose have had their senior seasons of basketball ruined. They left school and apparently were taken off scholarship, meaning they are unlikely to finish their degrees. And they might never regain their reputations; Google searches for years will bring up stories about drug arrests that never should have happened, under the law.

Meanwhile, ETSU is stumbling to the worst season in Murry Bartow's 10-year tenure. With Sheldon Cooley and Marcus Dubose on hand all season, the Bucs probably would have won six to eight additional games and be headed for a winning record. But law-enforcement rogues helped ensure the season would turn in a dark direction.

Murry Bartow has had some darned good teams at Johnson City. In his fourth through eighth seasons, the Bucs had records of 24-10, 19-13, 23-10, 20-15, and 24-12. ETSU has been to the NCAA Tournament three times, the NIT once, and the CIT once--a solid record for any coach in a league that receives only one bid each year to the NCAAs.

I'm hopeful that overall record will keep my friend's job safe for now. But even under a best-case scenario, he will be under intense heat when next season arrives.

Does court-related incompetence have real-world consequences? It sure as heck does--even in the unreal world of college athletics.

I hope Sheldon Cooley and Marcus Dubose find good lawyers and sue the holy hell out of somebody. If  the world has a shred of justice, they will have a year of college eligibility restored--and they will receive serious financial compensation from some source.

If Murry Bartow loses his job as a result of what happened to his two star players, I hope he sues the hell out of somebody. You can rest assured the author of Legal Schnauzer stands ready to make sure that story gets told far and wide.

Meanwhile, I will be pulling for ETSU to pull off an upset win or two this week in the A-Sun Tournament. It's not likely to happen, but they call it March Madness for a reason.

Big Luther Strange Tells A Whopper Of A Falsehood About High Court's Ruling On VictoryLand Search

Luther Strange

Alabama's attorney general is known as "Big Luther" Strange because he stands 6-foot-8. Perhaps the reason for Strange's nickname should be his tendency to tell enormous lies about politically charged cases involving his office.

The most recent example comes with Strange's statements about the impact of the Alabama Supreme Court's recent decision that forced a circuit judge to sign a search warrant for the VictoryLand casino in Macon County. Strange proclaimed in a press release that the ruling was a final determination that electronic bingo is illegal in Alabama and should "end the debate."

Strange's comments, to put it mildly, are a crock of barnyard excrement. How do we know? The words of the Alabama Supreme Court prove it. And those are the same justices who were willing to stretch the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment past the breaking point to give "Big Luther" a search warrant.

First, let's consider Strange's full statement to the public about what the search-warrant ruling meant:

This decision should end the debate on whether so-called 'electronic bingo' is illegal. It is illegal and local officials cannot create rules to make it legal. The only question now is whether the Legislature will enact tough penalties so that people will think twice before they engage in large-scale slot-machine gambling in the future.

How far off base is the attorney general on this one? About as far off base as you can get, given that the ruling had almost nothing to do with the alleged illegality of electronic-bingo machines at VictoryLand--or anywhere else in Alabama. How do I know? Well, I read the Supreme Court's opinion, and I invite readers to do the same; it's available at the end of this post.

Ironically, one reason the high court issued a writ of mandamus in the case is that it found Circuit Judge Thomas Young erred when he claimed the attorney general's office essentially was asking him to declare the VictoryLand machines illegal. In fact, the Supreme Court found, the issue was whether probable cause existed for a search warrant--nothing more, nothing less. From page 40 of the text:

Judge Young errs as a matter of law in refusing to issue the warrant in this case on the ground that to do so would be "in essence ... declaring these machines to be illegal." The quoted premise is incorrect. The issuance of a search warrant does not constitute a binding adjudication that an offense has occurred or a binding declaration that an activity or item is illegal. It is only a determination for purposes of the issuance of the search warrant.

The Supreme Court did not stop there. It explained that its ruling was not a finding that VictoryLand's activities were illegal--and it certainly was not a determination about electronic bingo in general:

As explained in Marshall v. Herndon, discussed supra, the issuance of a search warrant is not binding on either the court itself or the parties in an ensuing criminal case in which the defendant wishes to question whether an activity or item is illegal. See also, e.g., United States v. Del Valle, 587 F.2d 699, 701(5th Cir. 1079) (explaining that decision whether to issue search warrant is limited to the question of the issuance of the warrant and does not dispose of the issue whether the defendant did in fact commit the alleged crime).

Let's boil this down to its essence and compare the statements of Luther Strange to those of the Alabama Supreme Court:

Luther Strange: This decision should end the debate on whether so-called 'electronic bingo' is illegal. It is illegal and local officials cannot create rules to make it legal. 

Alabama Supreme Court: The issuance of a search warrant does not constitute a binding adjudication that an offense has occurred or a binding declaration that an activity or item is illegal.

If you live in Alabama and sense an odd sensation in your hindquarters, it's probably because Luther Strange is blowing smoke up your rectum.

We have shown, beyond a doubt, that Alabama's chief law-enforcement officer is willing to lie to gain a public-relations edge in the battle over electronic bingo. Why does Strange need a public-relations edge? Probably because even he realizes the machines at VictoryLand are legal, based on a constitutional amendment allowing electronic bingo in Macon County.

A reasonable Alabamian should ask this question: If Luther Strange is willing to lie in an official press release about the Supreme Court's actions, what else is he lying about? How deep does Luther Strange's dishonesty go?

Alabama Supreme Court VictoryLand Search Warrant by Roger Shuler

Even State AG Luther Strange Seemingly Is Aware That VictoryLand Raid Rests On Shaky Legal Ground

Macon County Judge Thomas Young

Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange must not be too confident that the results of his raid on the VictoryLand casino will hold up. He shouldn't be, of course, given that the Alabama Supreme Court acted in a flagrantly unconstitutional fashion when it ordered Macon County Circuit Judge Thomas Young to approve a search warrant on VictoryLand.

The new findings of a state regulatory board provide VictoryLand with additional ammunition for its argument that electronic-bingo machines at the facility legal. Meanwhile, Strange is seeking to have Judge Young removed from the case.

How will it all shake out? We will know more on March 19, when a hearing is set on VictoryLand's motion to have its property returned.

We know this much already: Luther Strange is acting like a desperate man--and perhaps he has good reason to behave that way. After all, the Alabama Alcoholic Beverage Control Board (ABC) has announced that it approved a liquor license for the VictoryLand casino.  In making its ruling, ABC found that it could not conclude the activities at VictoryLand are illegal.

On one hand, the ABC ruling might seem like a moot point, in the aftermath of Strange's raid. But Charlanna Spencer, an attorney for the casino, said the ABC decision supports VictoryLand’s argument that it is operating within the law. Attorneys for casino owner Milton McGregor are likely to emphasize that in their argument at the March 19 hearing.

Is VictoryLand likely to have its property returned? Strange must be concerned about it because he is asking Judge Young to recuse himself. Reports the Montgomery Advertiser:

Deputy Attorney General Sonny Reagan, in the motion, questions whether Young can be fair and impartial. 

“Judge Young’s cumulative record of clearly erroneous actions requiring reversal by the Supreme Court of Alabama in this and previous matters concerning alleged illegal gambling activities at the VictoryLand casino, together with his repeated criticisms of state officials seeking to enforce Alabama’s anti-gambling laws against VictoryLand, would cause any reasonable person to question Judge Young’s impartiality in matters pertaining to gambling at VictoryLand,” Reagan wrote.

The AG's recusal motion has a few problems. One, Young's ruling on the search-warrant application was not clearly erroneous. It was a discretionary ruling supported by relevant facts and law. It also was supported by the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, which denied the AG's petition for a writ of mandamus. That the Alabama Supreme Court ultimately granted mandamus does not remotely require Young's recusal; we are aware of no evidence indicating that Judge Young has a conflict of interest or personal bias against the state. Two, the mere fact that Young ruled against the AG on a search warrant does not justify recusal, under the law. Three, even the Alabama Supreme Court found in its 46-page ruling that the law is muddled on electronic bingo, raising this question: How could Young be expected to find probable cause that a law was being violated when even the state's high court cannot seem to identify solid law related to electronic bingo in Macon County?

From a public-relations standpoint, the AG's recusal motion makes him look like a world-class hypocrite. Reports the Montgomery Advertiser:

Joe Espy, an attorney representing VictoryLand, noted that the state opposed a similar recusal motion in Houston County last year. The Houston County Economic Development Authority requested Circuit Judge Mike Conaway to step away from a case involving electronic bingo at the Center Stage facility near Dothan. The group alleged Conaway had ties to local businessmen who were anti-gambling and had been appointed by Gov. Bob Riley, who initiated efforts to shut down gambling in the state.

At the time, Attorney General Luther Strange’s office argued that even if proof of such allegations could be found that would not disqualify Conaway from the case.

“The state’s position was adamant that the judge not be recused,” Espy said, accusing the attorney general of being more interested in winning the case “rather than being consistent and fair.”

Our guess is that Judge Young will refuse to step away from the case, and in our view, that would be the correct decision. If Strange puts the matter before his buddies on the Alabama Supreme Court, they might force Young to recuse.

But that brings us to perhaps the two key questions on the VictoryLand matter: How long will the Alabama Supreme Court continue to overrule circuit judges--not to mention the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals--so that Luther Strange can have his way? Will the state's high court reach a point where even it is embarrassed by an AG's office that clearly is driven by political motivations?

Luther Strange's actions in recent days indicate those questions are firmly planted in the back of his mind. He is leading the state's judiciary toward a potential PR disaster. How long will the public tolerate a high court that repeatedly abuses procedure by substituting its discretion for that of local judges? How long will the public tolerate a high court that puts its stamp of approval on government intrusions that appear to be unlawful because they are not grounded in probable cause?

Alabamians long have displayed a preference for control at the local level, for the authority of small government over the heavy hand of big government. Alabamians long have cast disapproving eyes at government intrusions on private affairs. That means the ice, at some point, is likely to get thin under the feet of Luther Strange and the Alabama Supreme Court.

We might be reaching that point pretty soon.

Student Complaints At The University Of Maine Could Lead to Legal Woes For CEO Ted Rollins

The Grove at Orono, Maine

Campus Crest Communities faces an official inquiry and possible legal action because of complaints from residents at its student-housing complex near the University of Maine.

Residents at The Grove in Orono, Maine, have complained about mold, broken water pipes, power outages, faulty appliances, inadequate heating units, and more. Town officials vowed to investigate the problems and held a closed-door meeting with Campus Crest officials in late January. According to press reports, more than a dozen students are considering legal action.

How might UMaine students fare in a court battle with Charlotte-based Campus Crest?

Well, we know that CEO Ted Rollins belongs to one of the nation's wealthiest family--the folks behind Orkin Pest Control and parent company Rollins Inc. in Atlanta--and he has a history of using the justice system in an abusive fashion. That's what he did in the Rollins v. Rollins divorce case, which produced a grossly unlawful final judgment here in Shelby County, Alabama, and led to Ted Rollins' ex wife (Sherry Carroll Rollins) and two daughters (Sarah and Emma Rollins) winding up on food stamps. Based on a report I received yesterday afternoon, utilities had been turned off at the Rollins household in Birmingham.

We also know that Ted Rollins has a history of treating young people like punching bags--literally and figuratively. In the literal sense, Rollins was convicted for assault in the vicious 1995 beating of his 16-year-old stepson, Zac Parrish, in Franklin County, North Carolina. Under relevant state law, the beating constituted an act of child abuse, although Rollins never was charged with that. He was, however, investigated in 1993 for child sexual abuse involving the same stepson, based on a citizen complaint.

Speaking figuratively, we know that Ted Rollins has heaped ongoing abuse upon Sarah and Emma Rollins--his own flesh and blood, who now are ages 18 and 15, respectively. A judge in Greenville, South Carolina--where Sherry Rollins initiated divorce proceedings--issued a bench warrant for Ted Rollins' arrest, based on failure to pay child support. Court records show that Ted Rollins was a deadbeat dad for more than two years.

Once the girls were forced to flee with their mother to Alabama--because Ted Rollins failed to pay court-ordered mortgage and insurance payments on the marital home--the financial abuse got even worse. Here in Shelby County, Ted Rollins filed a child-support affidavit claiming he made $50,000 a year working at a mortgage company in Brentwood, Tennessee--and that was his only source of income. Perjury on the sworn document, called a CS-41, could not be more clear, public records show that Ted Rollins owned multiple private jet craft and held ownership stakes in at least two companies when the affidavit was signed. But Ted Rollins never has been held accountable for lying under oath, and the cheat job cost his daughters hundreds of thousands of dollars in support, to which they were legally entitled over the course of their childhoods.

A number students at the University of Maine want out of their leases at The Grove and say they are willing to go to court. Do they have valid legal claims? Our research indicates the answer is yes, and we will be taking a closer look at the UMaine problems in upcoming posts.

Does that mean the students are likely to prevail in court? Not necessarily. Our reporting has shown that all too many court cases around the country are decided on issues that have nothing to do with facts or laws. They often are decided by virtue of one party's willingness, and ability, to gain unlawful favor with a judge.

Before UMaine students file legal claims against Campus Crest Communities, they might want to give Sherry Carroll Rollins a call in Birmingham, Alabama. She was married to the company's CEO for 14 years and knows what it is like to fight him, and the Rollins family resources, in a court of law.

Learning about Sherry Rollins' experience has been quite an education for me. It should be required reading for all college students who have, or are thinking about, signing a lease with The Grove.

(To be continued)

Issuance Of A Search Warrant At VictoryLand Casino Moves Alabama One Step Closer To A Police State

VictoryLand in Macon County

The Alabama Supreme Court has introduced a police state here in the Heart of Dixie--at least if the court's recent ruling on a search warrant at the VictoryLand casino is to be taken seriously.

Our guess is that the opinion in Ex parte State of Alabama (CR-12-0607), which was released last week, is not meant to be taken seriously. Its central message--that a trial-court judge must issue a search warrant whether he finds probable cause or not--is so flagrantly unconstitutional that future high courts are likely to ignore the ruling, knowing that it can't possibly set precedent.

A close reading of the opinion, which can be viewed at the end of this post, leaves the impression that it is a politically driven fraud upon the public. The document seems to be targeted only at VictoryLand and its owner, Milton McGregor, with no basis in actual law or concern about broader application.

Ex parte State of Alabama is our equivalent to the Bush v. Gore ruling that decided the 2000 presidential election. In that instance, the U.S. Supreme Court, in so many words, said, "This is a one-time ruling that is to have no precedential bearing on future cases. We had a desired outcome in mind, and we couldn't reach it via established law, so we pulled this out of our fannies."

That is essentially what the Alabama Supreme Court is saying with its VictoryLand ruling. The opinion is 46 pages long, but it boils down to these words that are found on page 44:

The Alabama Constitution and the Alabama Legislature decide the criminal law applicable in each of the 67 counties in this State. A circuit judge is not free to frustrate the enforcement of the criminal law by refusing to issue warrants necessary or appropriate to its enforcement in his or her circuit.

That would be news to the gentlemen who wrote the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects against unlawful searches and seizures. The Fourth Amendment requires that any warrant be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. If a judge finds that probable cause is lacking, it is his duty to "frustrate" overzealous law-enforcement officers and protect the targets of unlawful searches.

Macon County Circuit Judge Thomas Young made it clear that he found probable cause to be lacking when representatives from the office of Attorney General Luther Strange approached him seeking a search warrant for VictoryLand. Following are Young's exact words, included in his response to Strange's petition for a writ of mandamus with the Alabama Supreme Court:

In the instant case, given the fact that the Constitutional Amendment which provides for bingo being played at Victoryland allows the Sheriff to make a determination as to the nature of the bingo, and further, given the fact that he has publicly declared the machines presently located at that location to comply with the Supreme Court guidance in Cornerstone, there is clearly a lack of sufficient probable cause to warrant such an extraordinary writ.

Here is the crux of Young's finding in ruling against Strange's application for a search warrant:

The Petitioner, in essence, is asking this Court to sign an Order declaring these machines to be illegal, when there has been no such decision on this issue by any Court.

Is Young correct when he states that no court has ruled that the machines at VictoryLand constitute illegal activity? He must be because the Alabama Supreme Court does not counter that statement anywhere in its 46-page ruling. In fact, the high court acknowledges in a footnote on page 28 of its opinion that Alabama law on electronic bingo is so muddled that Young had almost no way of knowing what the law prohibits--much less that the evidence before him represented probable cause that the law was being violated. From the high court's footnote:

A judge considering an application for a search warrant necessarily must determine what it is that the law prohibits and then decide whether the evidence before the judge amounts to "probable cause" to believe that the conduct or items at issue fall within that prohibition. In the typical dispute over the propriety of a search warrant, the latter, factual issue predominates. The issue of what it is that extant law prohibits typically is a function solely of the terms of an applicable criminal statute and commonly is not in question. Here, however, the question of exactly what the law prohibits is at the fore and is a function not only of criminal statutes prohibiting "slot machines" and "gambling devices" but also of constitutional provisions permitting "bingo."

Faced with unclear law, and affidavits from Strange's underlings that he apparently determined were of dubious value, Young took a conservative approach and denied the search-warrant application. In so doing, he tried to spare a private enterprise from a government intrusion that he felt was unlawful.

You might think that our all-Republican Supreme Court--made up of conservatives who presumably want to keep government out of citizens' lives--would support such a cautious approach. But you would be wrong.

Starting on page 34 of its opinion, the Alabama Supreme Court lists eight issues upon which Young erred in denying Luther Strange's search warrant. Throughout 12 pages of explanation on these issues, the Supreme Court does not cite one Alabama case that supports its contention that Young erred.

In fact, the entire opinion includes only one citation to relevant Alabama law regarding Young's findings--and the high court butchers that. The case in question is styled Ex parte Nice, 407 So.2d 874 (Ala., 1981), and the court cited it in an effort to show that Young's denial of a search-warrant application represented "judicial usurpation of power" and "a gross disruption in the administration of criminal justice."

That line of thinking, to put it kindly, is preposterous. On page 34 of its opinion, the Alabama Supreme Court cites Marbury v. Madison, one of the most famous cases in American history, for its proposition that "it is a judge's duty to acknowledge what the law is and to decide how it applies to the facts before him." That is precisely what Young did, so how is that a "judicial usurpation of power."

The high court also acknowledges that Young was correct in stating that Strange could pursue a warrantless seizure under his "plain view" authority--if he truly believed the machines were operating illegally. Therefore, how did Young contribute to a "gross disruption in the administration of criminal justice"?

In fact, the Alabama Supreme Court violated the primary finding in Nice. Here is the crux of that case:

We state again that only the rarest of circumstances merit intervention by mandamus. . . . We also point out that circumstances involving alleged errors of judgment, or errors in the exercise of judicial discretion, would not constitute grounds for invoking supervisory mandamus.

Law does not get much more clear than that: Mandamus is appropriate in only the "rarest of circumstances and is not to be invoked for "alleged errors of judgment" or "errors in the exercise of judicial discretion." So why did the Alabama Supreme Court cite eight errors in judgment that Young allegedly committed? Perhaps it's because mandamus is not all that rare when it is used to help Luther Strange. Perhaps it's because our high court, which was unmasked as corrupt in the infamous ExxonMobil ruling of 2007, has no problem violating its own precedent--when it serves certain political purposes.

Judge Young clearly did not "frustrate" the enforcement of criminal law. He simply refused to rubber stamp a search-warrant application that he found to be lacking probable cause. He had the authority to make such a finding and the duty to protect VictoryLand from an unlawful search. That left Luther Strange with multiple options: (1) Conduct a "plain view" seizure; (2) Rework his search-warrant application to meet the standards of probable cause.

If the Alabama Supreme Court's ruling was not about the frustration of law enforcement, what was it about? We can come to only one conclusion: This is a continuation of the crusade against non-Indian gaming that former Governor Bob Riley and his allies launched in 2008. It's driven by the fact that Indian gaming interests, as admitted by GOP felon Jack Abramoff in his 2011 book, poured some $20 million into Alabama to get Riley elected. Luther Strange is Riley's most visible ally currently in office, and he has picked up where the former governor left off--with a blatantly unlawful effort to protect market share for Indian gaming interests.

This is about payoffs, paybacks, kickbacks, bribery, and all sorts of other ugly words. It also might be about extortion if Indian gaming interests are getting their way by holding damaging information over the heads of Bob Riley and his allies. It clearly has nothing to do with the law. And anyone who seriously reads the Alabama Supreme Court's opinion can see that.

Alabama Supreme Court VictoryLand Search Warrant by

Investigative Reporter Finds Holes In Official Finding Of Murder-Suicide In California Death of 9/11 Author

Phillip Marshall and his children

The 9/11 author who was found dead in his California home earlier this month was right-handed, but authorities determined that he shot himself in the left side of the head, a prominent investigative journalist reports.

The bodies of Phillip Marshall, his two children, and the family dog were found on February 2, and officials quickly determined it was a murder-suicide. But the Washington, D.C.-based Wayne Madsen Report (WMR) has found evidence that contradicts the official finding. WMR reports that Marshall might have possessed something in his Murphys, California, home that prompted someone to commit murder. Also, the community in Calaveras County is pushing for the sheriff's office to conduct a more thorough investigation.

Marshall was the author of several books that questioned the official story of 9/11. His most recent work, The Big Bamboozle: 9/11 and the War on Terror was released in 2012. But WMR reports that Marshall was working on a new book, and that might have led to his death.

Wayne Madsen's reporting is available by subscription at his Web site, but we have received permission to quote from his work on the Marshall case. Writes Madsen:

It is known that Marshall was working on a fourth book. Marshall told a close friend shortly before his death: "You're not going to believe the stuff I'm going to have in the next book."

Forensics of the case do not seem to add up to murder-suicide--and simple logistics also raise troubling questions. Reports Madsen:

WMR has obtained exclusive evidence that 9/11 analysis author Philip Marshall was right-handed. The Calaveras County Sheriff's Department quickly concluded that Marshall shot his two children, his dog, and himself in the left side of his head with a 9 mm Glock.

Whoever killed Marshall may have been tracking his daily routine. During the weekdays, Marshall's son Alex and daughter Macaila, and their dog "Suki," stayed with Marshall's estranged wife Sean at a condominium that Phil Marshall rented for his wife in the town of Angels Camp. The town is closer to the Bret Harte High School in nearby San Andreas than is the more remote subdivision of Forest Meadows outside of Murphys.

On weekends, however, the children stayed with Marshall at his home in Forest Meadows. But during the last week of January, Marshall's estranged wife was in Turkey on a trip paid for by Marshall to help his soon-to-be ex-wife establish an import business specializing in Turkish saffron, scented soaps, and linen. If Marshall was targeted during the weekday, the assailants may have been unaware of the presence of Marshall's children on a Thursday night (January 31) at the Forest Meadows home. Surprised by the presence of the children, they were shot, along with the noisy Shih-tzu.

What might have been in the Marshall home--or what did someone think was in the home? That might be the central question of the case, and Madsen examines it:

After WMR investigated the area around the Marshall home on February 13 and discovered a number of empty banker's boxes at the front door, we were informed that later that evening, someone broke into the house via a sliding door at the rear of the home in the gated community of Forest Meadows.

The next day, two family members and a friend of Marshall's estranged wife reportedly entered the home and rifled through drawers and boxes of papers in the garage in search of something. Forest Meadows Homeowners Association president David Turner was alerted to their presence and told them they had no permission to enter the premises. Turner also remarked that they "were making quite a mess." According to a neighbor, the estranged in-laws claimed they were looking for bills that had to be paid. It is known that Marshall was working on a fourth book. Marshall told a close friend shortly before his death: "You're not going to believe the stuff I'm going to have in the next book."

Marshall's friends are not sure what happened to his computer, with some reporting it is being held by the Sheriff's office and others claiming it is in the possession of Marshall's estranged wife. WMR has obtained a web posting from an in-law of Marshall's that states that in dealing with members of the press, high school friends of Marshall's children are to answer: ". . . this is a result of a DIAGNOSED (caps in original) mentally ill person getting their hands on a gun." There is no record of Marshall being diagnosed with a mental illness. He had only been treated temporarily in the past for depression.

Marshall apparently was well known and well liked in the community, and his friends are pushing for answers:

WMR has been contacted by a number of Calaveras County residents who have expressed outrage over the unprofessional and quick investigation by Calaveras County Sheriff Gary Kuntz of the shooting deaths of 9/11 analysis author Philip Marshall, his two teenage children -- Alex and Macaila -- and the family dog.

Kuntz, a native of North Dakota who enjoys dancing to German music, is loosely affiliated with a group of Western states' sheriffs called "county supremacists," offshoots of the Western state sheriffs-led "Sagebrush Rebellion" of the 1970s and 80s. One Calaveras County resident said many believed Kuntz to be a "prepper" and "truther." Prepper is the slang term for people who are prepared for everything from Armageddon to an economic collapse. "Truther" is a pejorative term for those who believe the government hid important facts about the 9/11 attack.

As news spreads around the county about the quick conclusion by Kuntz that Marshall shot his two children, his dog, and then himself with a 9 mm Glock, for which Marshall previously claimed he did not possess ammunition, other details about the case are beginning to show that the Sheriff's Department is, as local critics claim, incompetent. For example, Marshall was shot through the left side of his head. However, people who knew Marshall have come forward claiming that they knew the retired United Airlines pilot to be right-handed. They saw him throw baseballs and footballs with his right hand and one said he did not know Marshall to be ambidextrous but strictly right-handed.

Why Do Ex Wives Of Campus Crest CEO Ted Rollins Tend To Issue Warnings About Possible Child Abuse?

Ted Rollins

Birmingham resident Sherry Carroll Rollins did not realize it at the time, but she now says Ted Rollins' first wife tried to warn her that he might abuse her two sons from a previous marriage.

Sherry and Ted Rollins were married for 14 years before their divorce was finalized in 2005, right here in my backyard, Shelby County, Alabama. Ted Rollins grew up in one of the nation's wealthiest families, the folks behind Orkin Pest Control, and he has gone on to become CEO of Campus Crest Communities, a Charlotte-based developer of student housing that has received more than $400 million in Wall Street support.

Public documents reveal that the fears of Monica Bulich, Ted Rollins' first wife, came true. He was convicted in 1995 of assaulting his stepson, Zac Parrish, who was 16 years old at the time. Two years before that, social-services officials in North Carolina investigated Ted Rollins for possible child sexual abuse, based on a citizen complaint.

We do not know what prompted Monica Bulich to warn Sherry Carroll about what might be ahead for her. But we do know about some of what went on during Ted Rollins' second marriage. And in an example of history repeating itself, we know that Sherry Carroll Rollins sent a warning to the woman who would become Mrs. Ted Rollins, No. 3.

What drove Sherry Rollins' concerns? Once her divorce was complete, she knew that Ted Rollins was about to marry a woman named Holly Matheson, from Greenville, South Carolina. And the new woman in Ted Rollins' life had a son, Ethan Matheson, who was about 10 years old. That just happens to have been the age of Zac Parrish when Ted Rollins entered his life.

"Funny how Ted chooses wives with young boys," Sherry Rollins says. "Seems to be a pattern."

Sherry Rollins decided not be silent about her concerns:

I know [Ted] is still doing the same things to someone; just don't know who the victim is. I wrote Holly an anonymous letter when I heard she was marrying Ted. I told her he had abused a young boy, and he would do it again. I sent it to her from Asheville, North Carolina. I don't know what she thought or if she heeded the earning. I fear Ethan was Ted's interest in marrying her. I wonder if Ethan is alright.

Ethan Matheson is the same age as Sarah Rollins, one of two daughters (along with Emma Rollins) that Ted and Sherry Rollins had together. He now is a freshman at Colorado State University, one of the schools that soon will be home to The Grove, the banner under which Campus Crest builds student apartment complexes.

Sherry Rollins says her daughter and Ethan Matheson have become fairly good friends. "Sarah says that Ethan hates Ted and says he is crazy. I wish Zac could talk to Ethan. . . . I wonder if [Ted] has gotten to Ethan."

Did Ethan Matheson become a victim when his mother married Ted Rollins? We do not have a sure answer to that question, but Sherry Rollins provides important history:

Ted got with Holly when Ethan was 8 years old. Ted had met Holly and Ethan, as Ethan was a little boy in Sarah's class at school. He came to our house for Sarah's birthday party, with his mom and dad. We always saw them at school, at events. So when [Sarah, Emma, and I] left Greenville, Ethan was 8 years old. Ted moved in with Holly and Ethan when Ethan was 9 or 10. 

I sent her the letter in 2005, after my divorce--so Ethan was by then 10 years old. I told her I was afraid that Ted might harm him, as he had already done to another boy. I never signed my name and signed it as someone concerned about the safety of her child.

(To be continued)