A MISSOURI LAWYER'S
FRIDAY NIGHT RAMBLINGS


FOR

JUNE 30, 2006


These are the Ramblings of a small town, (Holden, population 2,700), Missouri, country lawyer. They contain my random thoughts and observations on current events and my life and experiences in the Solo Practice of law.
Compiled here are the Ramblings for 2002 - 2006.

I have decided to finish my legal career serving the citizens of Johnson County, Missouri as their Associate Circuit Judge.  I ask for your support. 

http://www.karltimmerman.com/ktimmerman.html

Archived Prior Ramblings
CLICK ON A DATE

In Memoriam:
September 11, 2001

                2002
  02-22-02  03-30-02  04-05-02
  04-21-02  04-27-02  05-01-02
  05-03-02  05-10-02  05-17-02
  05-31-02  06-21-02  06-26-02
  06-29-02  07-04-02  07-05-02
  07-12-02  08-02-02  08-10-02
  08-21-02  08-23-02  08-30-02
  09-06-02  09-11-02  09-11-02F
  09-13-02  09-20-02  09-27-02
  10-04-02  10-11-02  10-18-02
  10-25-02  11-01-02  11-08-02
  11-15-02  11-22-02  11-29-02
  12-06-02  12-13-02  12-20-02
  12-27-02

                     2003
  01-03-03  01-10-03  01-10-03R
  01-17-03  01-24-03  01-31-03
  02-07-03  02-14-03  02-21-03
  02-28-03  03-07-03  03-14-03
  03-21-03  03-28-03  04-04-03
  04-11-03  04-18-03  04-25-03
  05-02-03  05-09-03  05-16-03
  05-23-03  05-30-03  06-06-03
  06-20-03  06-27-03  07-04-03
  07-11-03  07-18-03  07-25-03
  08-01-03  08-08-03  08-15-03
  08-22-03  08-29-03  09-05-03
  09-12-03  09-19-03  09-26-03
  10-03-03  10-10-03  10-17-03
  10-24-03  10-31-03  11-07-03
  11-14-03  11-21-03  11-28-03
  12-05-03  12-12-03  12-19-03
  12-26-03 

                     2004
  01-02-04  01-09-04  01-16-04
  01-23-04  01-30-04  02-06-04
  02-13-04  02-20-04  02-27-04
  03-05-04  03-12-04  03-19-04
  03-29-04  04-02-04  04-09-04
  04-16-04  04-23-04  04-30-04
  05-07-04  05-14-04  05-21-04
  05-28-04  06-11-04  06-18-04
  06-25-04  07-09-04  07-16-04
  07-23-04  07-30-04  08-06-04
  08-13-04  08-20-04  08-27-04
  09-03-04  09-10-04  09-17-04
  09-24-04  10-01-04  10-08-04
  10-15-04  10-22-04  10-29-04
  11-05-04  10-12-04  11-19-04
  11-26-04  12-03-04  12-10-04
  12-17-04  12-24-04  12-30-04
 
                2005
  01-07-05  01-14-05  01-21-05
  01-28-05  02-04-05  02-11-05
  02-18-05  02-25-05  03-04-05
  03-11-05  03-18-05  03-25-05
  04-02-05  04-08-05  04-15-05
  04-22-05  04-29-05  05-06-05
  05-13-05  05-20-05  05-27-05
  06-03-05  06-12-05  06-17-05
  06-24-05  07-01-05  07-08-05
  07-15-05  07-22-05  07-29-05
  08-05-05  08-12-05  08-19-05
  08-26-05  09-02-05  09-09-05
  09-16-05  09-23-05  09-30-05
  10-07-05  10-14-05  10-21-05
  10-28-05  11-04-05  11-11-05
  11-18-05  11-25-05  12-02-05
  12-09-05  12-16-05  12-23-05
  12-30-05
 
                  2006
  01-06-06  01-13-06  01-20-06
  01-27-06  02-03-06  02-10-06
  02-17-06  02-24-06  03-03-06
  03-10-06  03-17-06  03-24-06
  03-31-06  04-07-06  04-14-06
  04-21-06  04-28-06  05-05-06
  05-12-06  05-19-06  05-26-06
  06-02-06  06-09-06  06-16-06
  06-23-06  06-30-06
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
Greets and Huggers. Posted the evening of June 30, 2006. On the SFIG this week, someone requested wording for a paragraph in a Dissolution Decree: " I need some language to the effect that a child shall not live in home with party when person of the opposite sex (and not related to parties by blood or marriage) is staying there." ... to which another member responded .... " Why? You a throw-back to the '50s? This is an antiquated provision that presumes it is acceptable for a former partner to govern the decisions made by the other party about who will be at the home, or that a trial court may dictate such in the absence of specific evidence warranting a finding that the child is being, has been, or is likely to be, subject to physical or emotional harm by the presence of a person not related by blood or marriage to the parent whose home is at issue." .... and another responded ... "why limit it to only "opposite gender"? that's so 1950's!!!" ... and another responded ... "Oh for crud sake. There's more there than just the boyfriend that needs attention, and in the absence of evidence that the boyfriend is a problem, you're attacking a mouse with an elephant gun. Why not look at the fact that the child probably will be sharing a room or, gasp, a bed with the mother? Look at the whole picture, don't make stereotypical judgments that would cause you to use language that might not be at all needed. And what does the bar have to do with it? I think there is some myopia occurring here. Is Dad paying child support? maybe Dad should be paying maintenance? How come Mom does not have enough money to live in her own digs? Dad take the savings? Why did she feel the need to get out so fast she took what was available? I mean, what's the FULL picture?" .... and another point of view .... "I'm a little bit frustrated at the idea that it is bad for someone Mom or Dad to have some restrictions in a parenting plan that have morality, stability, consistency as a basis. It should be beneficial to the children to have in many instances these restrictions." ... and another observation ... "well, they will only appear in parenting plans by consent now, as our courts have finally recognized that they are antiquated and improper to impose on parties." Interesting how our world has changed. Reasonable, honorable, persons can disagree on whether a child needs a "traditional" Mom and Dad raising them ... a traditional "family". Social science research supports the position of the person conducting the research. Hard to design an unbiased study. No doubt, we have evolved as a species with a traditional extended "family" at it's core. Two or three generations under one roof. But social paradigms have changed. Our elders die in "assisted living facilities" now, instead of their own beds ... in the homes where they raised their children. Their children have no role models, no guidance on how to deal with growing older. [Share with me ... did you check into this life with an "Owners Manual"? Or, are you doing this dance by trail and error?] Is it really for the better? Guess we will find out. For thousands of years, extended "family" has raised offspring ... aren't you and I a product of that evolutionary process? Aren't we Mr. and Mrs. Beaver Cleaver's children? I guess the bottom line question is: what constitutes "moral", [an interesting link to read] ... an abstract concept .... versus "moral" or "immoral" behavior and what impact observing "moral" or "immoral" behavior has on our children. I strongly suspect, our children will survive and prosper ... even given our gross malpractice as parents!! And to answer the original question? A child should be loved, have a stable home environment ... a set routine, defined parameters ... and a "male" and "female" role model. "As the twig is bent, so the tree shall grow." What matters, is not the marital status nor gender of co-habituating partners .... but the commitment of the partners to each other and their child. Marriage, (if possible), is a damn good indicator of that commitment. Course, what do I know.

Paul I, in response to a past Ramblings opined the taking of a human life is not "immoral" ... but the motive for doing may be. I continue to believe, the taking of human life is immoral ... only justifiable, to protect/preserve human life. My Dear and much Respected Friend asked for authority supporting my position. How about the 6th Commandment? 'Nuff said.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Shells may have been earliest jewelry. "Ancient beads that may represent the oldest attempt by people at self-decoration have been identified from sites in Algeria and Israel. The beads, made from shells with holes bored into them, date to around 100,000 years ago, some 25,000 years older than similar beads discovered two years ago in South Africa, researchers report in Friday's issue of the journal Science." So, don't you have to ask yourself, isn't this the product of some poor pilgrim, 100,000 years ago, sitting in a cave, working on some dumb ass shells he found ... trying to come up with a "Mothers Day" gift for his Lady?

A contest ... come up with a non-offensive punch line for this story ... PROVIDENCE, Rhode Island (AP) -- Man wins $400K for 10-year implant malfunction. " A former handyman has won more than $400,000 in a lawsuit over a penile implant that gave him a 10-year erection. Charles "Chick" Lennon, 68, received the steel and plastic implant in 1996, about two years before Viagra went on the market. The Dura-II is designed to allow impotent men to position the penis upward for sex, then lower it. But Lennon could not position his penis downward. He said he could no longer hug people, ride a bike, swim or wear bathing trunks because of the pain and embarrassment." Good. The damage award would have been greater .... but for the fact Mr. Lennon .... [insert your line]

1. Karl T ... had an increase in income, working as a pull toy at "Toys R Us".

2. Corinne C. ... The damage award would have been greater if Mr. Lennon could have been judged by a jury of his peers, but no one in the venire panel would admit to having had similar problems.

3. Lindsay W. ... The damage award would have been greater had the judge sustained Mr. Lennon's motion in limine to exclude evidence of his employment in the adult entertainment industry.

4. Greg G ... The damage award would have been greater had Mr. Lennon's attorney correctly annunciated to the jury his client's nickname being "Chick" instead of "Dick".

5. Ronald W. ... ...no one noticed the difference.

6. Jeffrey L. ... Mr. Lemon, who had a terrible phobia for air flight, never went side ways through a turnstile for fear he was going to Bangkok.

7. Mark R. ... The damage award would have been greater but for testimony that, for the past ten years, Mr. Lennon enjoyed the noteworthy benefit of being able to go camping whenever and wherever he liked, rain or shine, as a result of his permanently pitched tent.

8. Shelley B. ... rose to the occasion, erecting a rigid defense for the opposition, when he called his wife as a witness and said witness testified that Mr. Lennon was hung like a parakeet and she could never tell the difference.

9. Paul I. ... "The damage award would have been greater but for the fact Mr. Lennon could not get the evidence to stand up in court" ... and .. "The damage award would have been greater but for the fact Mr. Lennon's opposing counsel reminded the court that 'de minimus non curat lex.'"

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Study: Cell phone signals excite brain. "Cell phone emissions excite the part of the brain cortex nearest to the phone, but it is not clear if these effects are harmful, Italian researchers reported on Monday. Their study, published in the Annals of Neurology, adds to a growing body of research about mobile phones, their possible effects on the brain, and whether there is any link to cancer." Samsung, , Nokia, LG and Motorola announced a new accessory for their vibrating ringer cell phone lines today ... the "Crotch Bag".

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Charges raise specter of military death sentences. "Not since World War II have members of the U.S. military faced murder charges for killing prisoners. And not since the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War have U.S. soldiers been formally accused of indiscriminately slaughtering innocent civilians. But deadly prisoner abuses in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and the recent rash of alleged atrocities by troops there are testing the military's justice system, and raising the possibility of a death sentence that is seldom imposed and even more rarely carried out." ... and .... BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- U.S. probes another report of civilian deaths. "The U.S. Army has ordered an investigation into the deaths of an Iraqi family of four at their home in Mahmoudiya, a town south of Baghdad, a U.S. military statement said Friday. The investigation concerns allegations that at least two U.S. soldiers were involved in the rape of a woman and that one of them killed her, a child and two other adults, U.S. military sources said." They are trying to track down the soldier who allegedly committed the acts ... he was sent back to the United States early because of psychological problems. I have news: it will get alot worse before it gets better. Keeping your troops from dehumanizing civilians .... when the enemy dons civilian attire and hides among a civilian population ... is part of the difficulty in maintaining command and control ... when fighting an insurgency. A hard lesson learned in Vietnam ... we are getting a refresher course.

Sitting here editing these Ramblings and listening to the evening news. Experts warn the up coming space shuttle launch tomorrow is a roll of the dice, the "foam" problem has not been solved. I had two back to back hearings this morning, (and will spend the next 4 days campaigning door to door) ... Susan spent the day in Cole Camp at " 7 Bells Sanctuary", helping to give the dogs a bath. "Alan" is sitting in my chair with me .... barking snide remarks about these Ramblings. It is amazing how attached you become to these little furballs. "Hoppy", (a 7 year old, long haired miniature Daschund), still needs a "family" to adopt him ... Please, if you have room in your heart/home for a "little buddy" ... send me an email. Susan is happy ... she feels like she made a small difference today, (she did ... isn't it the small selfless things you do ... that make the difference?) ... she remains what makes my life worth living. Something I will thank God for when we drift off to sleep tonight. I will also say a payer for the safe return of our men and women in uniform, (care to join me?) .... <whispering> ... Please, Please, Please, God .... let them come home safe and soon. Be and sleep well, have a safe 4th of July celebration ... and remember to thank our men and women in uniform for their service. If my post offends, I apologize ... that is not my intent. As always ...

A Warm Brotherly Hug

Karl (the dumb ole country lawyer from Holden Missouri .... "Alan" burps and farts his greetings!)

"Timmerman for Judge Campaign Committee": http://www.timmermanforjudge.com/

Click here to read an Interview of the Author.

Karl H. Timmerman M.A. J.D. 2006
All Rights Reserved

Click here to
Send a Comment to the Author
or be added to the Ramblings Listserve