Israel, You Rascals

Mark Steel started doing stand-up in 1982 in England, around the circuit of bizarre gigs, going on after jugglers and escapologists and people that banged nails into their ear. Then came the Comedy Store and Jongleurs and getting bottled off at The Tunnel, and then a regular slot on Radio 4′s Loose Ends, where he met Joseph Heller, Christopher Lee and Gary Glitter. He did 4 series of ‘The Mark Steel Solution’, one for Radio 5 and the others on Radio 4, and a radio series about cricket, which provoked a whole page of fury in the Daily Express. He presented three series of a sports programme called ‘Extra Time’ which he was very proud of, especially as it went out on Tuesday nights on Radio 5 to possibly no listeners whatsoever. Then there was four series of the lectures on Radio 4, a book called ‘It’s Not a Runner Bean’, another one called ‘Reasons to be Cheerful’, and 3 television series of the lectures on BBC 4 and BBC 2. He has done weekly columns in Socialist Worker, the Guardian and the Independent. He has written a book called ‘Vive le Revolution’, and has been on various panel shows like Have I Got News For You and QI, and on Room 101, and on Question Time he says that he “got very confused when I insulted a member of the Tory shadow cabinet, and afterwards he said I was splendid and invited me for a drink.” And he’s spoken at lots of demonstrations and union meetings and protests, and appeared at quite a few benefits. This essay originally appeared on his website: http://marksteelinfo.com/blog/.

The acceptability and utility of voir dire questionnaires in Florida Circuit Civil Court

This study examined the acceptability and utility of the content of an extensive automobile tort voir dire questionnaire in Florida Circuit Civil Court. The ultimate purpose was to find questionnaire items from established measures that have demonstrated utility in uncovering biases that were at the same time not objectionable to the courts. The survey instrument included a venireperson questionnaire that used case-specific attitudinal and personality measures as well as typical information asked about personal history. The venireperson questionnaire incorporated measures that have proven reliable in other personal injury studies (Hans, & Lofquist, 1994). In order to examine judges' ratings, the questionnaire items were grouped into eight categories. Claims Consciousness scale measures general attitudes towards making claims based on one's legal rights. Belief in a Just World measures how sympathetic the juror would be to people who have suffered injuries. Political Efficacy is another general attitude scale that identifies attitudes towards the government. Litigation Crisis scales elicits attitudes about civil litigation. Case Specific Beliefs about Automobile Accidents and Litigation were taken from questionnaires developed and used in auto torts and other personal injury cases. Juror's personal history was divided into Demographics and Trial Relevant Attitudes. Ninety-seven circuit civil judges critiqued the questionnaire for acceptability, relevance to the type of case presented, and usefulness to attorneys for determining peremptories. ^ The majority of judges' responses confirmed that the central dimension in judicial thinking is juror qualification rather than juror partiality. Only three of the eight voir dire categories were considered relevant by more than 50 percent of the judges: Trial Relevant Experiences, Juror Demographics, and Tort Reform. Additionally, several acceptable items from generally disapproved categories were identified among the responses. These were general and case specific attitudinal items that are related to tort reform. We discuss the utility of voir dire items for discerning juror partiality. ^