http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Richardson
Excerpt:
Personal life
Richardson was married to actress Vanessa Redgrave from 1962 until they divorced in 1967. The couple had two daughters, Natasha Richardson (1963–2009) and Joely Richardson (born 1965), both actresses. He left Redgrave for actress Jeanne Moreau.[citation needed] He also had a relationship with Grizelda Grimond, the daughter of British politician Jo Grimond, they had a daughter, Katharine Grimond.[citation needed]
Richardson was bisexual, but never acknowledged it publicly until after he contracted AIDS. He died of complications from AIDS in 1991.[5]
Jo Grimond wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jo_Grimond
Excerpt:
Early life
Grimond was born in St Andrews in Fife and was educated at Eton College and Balliol College, Oxford. He became a barrister, and in 1938 married Laura Bonham Carter, a granddaughter of former Prime Minister Herbert Henry Asquith, and aunt to actress Helena Bonham Carter.
Helena Bonham Carter wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helena_Bonham_Carter#External_links
Excerpt:
Early life and family background
Helena Bonham Carter was born in Golders Green, London. Her mother, Elena (née Propper de Callejón), is a psychotherapist.[1] Her father, Raymond Bonham Carter, was a merchant banker, and served as the alternative British director representing the Bank of England at the International Monetary Fund in Washington, D.C. during the 1960s.[1][2][3] He came from a famous British political family, being the son of British Liberal politician Sir Maurice Bonham Carter and renowned politician and orator Violet Bonham Carter, whose father was the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, H. H. Asquith (serving 1908–1916). Helena Bonham Carter's maternal grandfather, Spanish diplomat Eduardo Propper de Callejón, saved thousands of Jews from the Holocaust during World War II, for which he was recognised as Righteous among the Nations (his own father had been Jewish). He later served as Minister-Counselor at the Spanish Embassy in Washington, D.C.
Bonham Carter's maternal grandmother, Hélène Fould-Springer, was from an upper-class Jewish family; she was the daughter of Baron Eugène Fould-Springer (a French-born banker) and Marie Cecile von Springer (whose father was Austrian-born industrialist Baron Gustav Springer).[1][4][5] Hélène Fould-Springer's sister was the French philanthropist Liliane de Rothschild (1916–2003), the wife of Baron Élie de Rothschild, of the prominent Rothschild family (who had also married within the von Springer family in the 19th century);[6] her other sister, Therese Fould-Springer, was the mother of British writer David Pryce-Jones.[4]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._H._Asquith
HH Asquith wikipedia
Excerpt:
Marriages
He married Helen Kelsall Melland, daughter of a Manchester doctor, in 1877, and they had four sons and one daughter before she died from typhoid fever in 1891. These children were Raymond (1878–1916), Herbert (1881–1947), Arthur (1883–1939), Violet (1887–1969), and Cyril (1890–1954). Of these children, Violet and Cyril became life peers in their own right, Cyril becoming a law lord.[6][7]
In 1894, he married Margot Tennant, a daughter of Sir Charles Tennant, 1st Bt. They had two children, Elizabeth Charlotte Lucy (later Princess Antoine Bibesco) (1897–1945) and the film director Anthony (1902–1968).[6][7]
In 1912, Asquith fell in love with Venetia Stanley, and his romantic obsession with her continued into 1915, when she married Edwin Montagu, a Liberal Cabinet Minister; a volume of Asquith's letters to Venetia, often written during Cabinet meetings and describing political business in some detail, has been published, but it is not known whether or not their relationship was sexually consummated.[6][7]
All his children, except Anthony, married and left issue. His best-known descendant today is the actress Helena Bonham Carter, a granddaughter of Violet.[6][7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Samuel_Montagu
Edwin Samuel Montagu wikipedia
Excerpt:
Montagu was the second Jew to enter the British Cabinet. However, he was strongly opposed to Zionism, which he called "a mischievous political creed", and opposed the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which he considered anti-semitic and whose terms he managed to modify. In a memo to the cabinet, he outlined his views on Zionism thus: "...I assume that it means that Mahommedans and Christians are to make way for the Jews and that the Jews should be put in all positions of preference and should be peculiarly associated with Palestine in the same way that England is with the English or France with the French, that Turks and other Mahommedans in Palestine will be regarded as foreigners, just in the same way as Jews will hereafter be treated as foreigners in every country but Palestine. Perhaps also citizenship must be granted only as a result of a religious test."[4] He was opposed by his cousin Herbert Samuel, a moderate Zionist who became the first High Commissioner of Palestine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Samuel,_1st_Viscount_Samuel
Herbert Samuel wikipedia
Excerpt:
Appointment as High Commissioner
Samuel was a dedicated Zionist. In 1915 he submitted a memorandum suggesting that Palestine become a home for the Jewish people, but at that time it had received little sympathy.[3]
In 1917, Britain occupied Palestine (then part of the Ottoman Empire) during the course of the First World War. Samuel lost his seat in the election of 1918 and became a candidate to represent British interests in the territory. He was appointed to the position of High Commissioner in 1920, before the Council of the League of Nations approved a British mandate for Palestine. Nonetheless, the military government withdrew to Cairo in preparation for the expected British Mandate, which was finally granted 2 years later by the League of Nations. He served as High Commissioner until 1925 [1]. Samuel was the first Jew to govern the historic land of Israel in 2,000 years.[4] He recognised Hebrew as one of the three official languages of the Mandate territory. He was appointed Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the British Empire (GBE) on 11 June 1920.
Marlon Brando on Larry King Live Anger at the Hollywood Jews
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN17c2v2Vgk&NR=1
http://www.mideastweb.org/zionism.htm
Excerpt:
Zionism and the Arabs
When Zionism had its first beginnings, in the early 19th century, there were about 200,000 Arabs living between the Jordan river and the Mediterranean in the approximate area that later became "Palestine," mostly concentrated in the countryside of the West Bank and Galilee, and mostly lacking in national sentiment. Palestine was, in Western eyes, a country without a nation, as Lord Shaftesbury wrote. Early proto-Zionists did not trouble themselves at all about the existing inhabitants. Many were heavy influenced by utopianism. In the best 19th century tradition, they were creating a Jewish utopia, where an ancient people would be revived. They envisioned a land without strife, where all national and economic problems would be solved by good will, enlightened and progressive policies and technological know-how. Herzl's Altneuland was in in fact just such a utopia. In the novel, Herzl envisioned a modern pluralistic society, in which Jews and Arabs had equal rights. A demagogic politician who wanted to form a narrow hyper-nationalist Jewish state, was defeated in elections.
http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/spring97/blackstone.html
Excerpt:
Little could Blackstone know that the lectures he began so tentatively that day would be published as Commentaries on the Laws of England, a work that would dominate the common law legal system for more than a century. Nor could he foresee that his words would shape the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and primal laws of a land he considered no more than conquered territory of the British crown. He could not forsee another failure in life studying his Commentaries in the frontier village of New Salem, Illinois, teaching himself law. And little could he imagine that two hundred years later gangsters would call their lawyers by his name.
Blackstone spoke and wrote in the times of Oliver Goldsmith and Samuel Johnson, Edward Gibbon and Adam Smith, David Hume and Benjamin Franklin. Cultural institutions such as the British Museum, that today seem ancient, were in their infancy. The law then, as now, was rooted in everyday life but removed by lawyers and courts from most people's lives. Blackstone's task, and his ultimate accomplishment, was to open the law to many for whom it had been closed.
Despite his initial misgivings, the lectures were an immediate success, breathing life into a dry and poorly taught subject. Blackstone's lectures were published as the Commentaries in England between 1765 and 1769. An American edition published in Philadelphia between 1771-72 sold out its first printing of 1,400 and a second edition soon appeared. The Commentaries were translated into French, German and Russian. During his lifetime the work earned an estimated 14,000 pounds, an enormous amount of money at the time. His work would also earn him belated success as a lawyer, politician, judge and scholar. Blackstone, however, more than paid for his success; he and his book became the targets of some of the most vitriolic attacks ever mounted upon a man or his ideas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Blackstone
William Blackstone wikipedia
Excerpt:
Within United States academia and practise, as well as within the judiciary, the Commentaries had a substantial impact; with the scarcity of law books on the frontier, they were "both the only law school and the only law library most American lawyers used to practise law in America for nearly a century after they were published".[107] Blackstone had drawn up a plan for a dedicated School of Law, and submitted it to the University of Oxford; when the idea was rejected he included it in the Commentaries. It is from this plan that the modern system of American law schools comes.[1] Subscribers to the first edition of Blackstone, and later readers who were profoundly influenced by it, include James Iredell, John Marshall, James Wilson, John Jay, John Adams, James Kent and Abraham Lincoln.[108]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone's_formulation
Blackston's Formulation wikipedia
Excerpt:
The twelfth-century legal theorist Maimonides, expounding on this passage as well as Exodus 23:7 ("the innocent and righteous slay thou not") argued that executing an accused criminal on anything less than absolute certainty would progressively lead to convictions merely "according to the judge's caprice. Hence the Exalted One has shut this door" against the use of presumptive evidence, for "it is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death."[1][3][4]
Sir John Fortescue's De Laudibus Legum Angliae (c. 1470) states that "one would much rather that twenty guilty persons should escape the punishment of death, than that one innocent person should be condemned and suffer capitally." Similarly, on October 3, 1692, while decrying the Salem witch trials, Increase Mather adapted Fortescue's statement and wrote, "It were better that Ten Suspected Witches should escape, than that the Innocent Person should be Condemned."
Other commentators have echoed the principle; Benjamin Franklin stated it as, "it is better [one hundred] guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer".[5] But more authoritarian personalities are supposed to have taken the opposite view; Bismarck is believed to have stated that "it is better that ten innocent men suffer than one guilty man escape;"[1] and Pol Pot[6] and Wolfgang Schäuble[7] have made similar remarks. The latter said in the context of crime prediction (not crime punishment) that he believes that it is not better to let ten terrorist attacks happen than to try to hinder one possibly innocent person to conduct one.
http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/spring97/blackstone.html
Excerpt:
Little could Blackstone know that the lectures he began so tentatively that day would be published as Commentaries on the Laws of England, a work that would dominate the common law legal system for more than a century. Nor could he foresee that his words would shape the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and primal laws of a land he considered no more than conquered territory of the British crown. He could not forsee another failure in life studying his Commentaries in the frontier village of New Salem, Illinois, teaching himself law. And little could he imagine that two hundred years later gangsters would call their lawyers by his name.
Blackstone spoke and wrote in the times of Oliver Goldsmith and Samuel Johnson, Edward Gibbon and Adam Smith, David Hume and Benjamin Franklin. Cultural institutions such as the British Museum, that today seem ancient, were in their infancy. The law then, as now, was rooted in everyday life but removed by lawyers and courts from most people's lives. Blackstone's task, and his ultimate accomplishment, was to open the law to many for whom it had been closed.
Despite his initial misgivings, the lectures were an immediate success, breathing life into a dry and poorly taught subject. Blackstone's lectures were published as the Commentaries in England between 1765 and 1769. An American edition published in Philadelphia between 1771-72 sold out its first printing of 1,400 and a second edition soon appeared. The Commentaries were translated into French, German and Russian. During his lifetime the work earned an estimated 14,000 pounds, an enormous amount of money at the time. His work would also earn him belated success as a lawyer, politician, judge and scholar. Blackstone, however, more than paid for his success; he and his book became the targets of some of the most vitriolic attacks ever mounted upon a man or his ideas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Blackstone
William Blackstone wikipedia
Excerpt:
Within United States academia and practise, as well as within the judiciary, the Commentaries had a substantial impact; with the scarcity of law books on the frontier, they were "both the only law school and the only law library most American lawyers used to practise law in America for nearly a century after they were published".[107] Blackstone had drawn up a plan for a dedicated School of Law, and submitted it to the University of Oxford; when the idea was rejected he included it in the Commentaries. It is from this plan that the modern system of American law schools comes.[1] Subscribers to the first edition of Blackstone, and later readers who were profoundly influenced by it, include James Iredell, John Marshall, James Wilson, John Jay, John Adams, James Kent and Abraham Lincoln.[108]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone's_formulation
Blackston's Formulation wikipedia
Excerpt:
Blackstone's formulation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In criminal law, Blackstone's formulation (also known as Blackstone's ratio or the Blackstone ratio) is the principle: "better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer", expressed by the English jurist William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, published in the 1760s.Contents |
[edit] Historical expressions of the principle
The principle is much older than Blackstone's formulation, being closely tied to the presumption of innocence in criminal trials. An early example of the principle appears in the Bible (Genesis 18:23-32),[1][2] as:| “ | And Abraham drew near and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?... That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? And the Lord said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes... And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake. | ” |
Sir John Fortescue's De Laudibus Legum Angliae (c. 1470) states that "one would much rather that twenty guilty persons should escape the punishment of death, than that one innocent person should be condemned and suffer capitally." Similarly, on October 3, 1692, while decrying the Salem witch trials, Increase Mather adapted Fortescue's statement and wrote, "It were better that Ten Suspected Witches should escape, than that the Innocent Person should be Condemned."
Other commentators have echoed the principle; Benjamin Franklin stated it as, "it is better [one hundred] guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer".[5] But more authoritarian personalities are supposed to have taken the opposite view; Bismarck is believed to have stated that "it is better that ten innocent men suffer than one guilty man escape;"[1] and Pol Pot[6] and Wolfgang Schäuble[7] have made similar remarks. The latter said in the context of crime prediction (not crime punishment) that he believes that it is not better to let ten terrorist attacks happen than to try to hinder one possibly innocent person to conduct one.
