DOCSLIB.ORG

Quality Assurance Study of Jury Services and Stress"

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Quality Assurance Study of Jury Services and Stress JURORS AS UNINTENDED VICTIMS "A Quality Assurance Study of Jury Services and Stress" “I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principle of its constitution.” President Thomas Jefferson Institute for Court Management Court Fellows Development Program 2011 - 2012 Phase III Project May 2012 Marilyn J. Finsen Assistant Administrator Superior Court Operations Snohomish County Superior Court 3000 Rockefeller Everett, Washington 98201 Acknowledgements To anyone who has responded to a call for jury duty, thank you. It is within the context of your service that we in Snohomish County were once again able to ask for your insight. To the many that responded I appreciate the personal time and energy it took to revisit your experiences and record your comments on the surveys to make this project possible. The feasibility of this research grew beyond an idea because of the insight and support of Presiding Judge Ellen Fair and Court Administrator Bob Terwilliger. I am fortunate to serve a Superior Court Bench that provided counsel as this project evolved. Throughout the many months I worked on aspects of the research with my management team: Ann Howard, Kathy Haggerty, Chris Shambro and Janelle Sgrignoli. Each was instrumental in discussing outcomes and ideas. The technology support provided by Chris Shambro and Pam Seiber allowed the research to develop into a more understandable presentation. Sue Pence and Jessica Swint provided valuable insight from their 20 plus years of direct jury management. I am eternally grateful to this wonderful group of people for whom without their support, assistance and participation this project would not have been possible. I was honored to be the recipient of the National Association for Court Management's Edward C. Gallas Award Scholarship for 2010 which provided financial support in combination with Snohomish County Superior Court that allowed me to continue with the Court Management Fellow’s Program. As one can clearly see this project was not achievable through a single effort. This was an extended team effort developed on the talents of dedicated staff within Snohomish County Superior Court and the professional guidance from experts at the National Center of State Courts. I thank the faculty of the Court Management Program for the inspiration and professional growth led by Dan Straub. i My individual researchers and tutors regarding tips, tools and techniques; Joan K. Cochet, Nicole Waters and David Rottman. I was fortunate to be supervised by David Rottman whose expertise was instrumental to this project going forward. I so appreciated his encouragement and counsel as I worked through balancing this project with personal challenges. Foremost I offer special acknowledgement to my husband Randy who was a cheerleader, analyst and ghost writer as we worked this project. He grounded me. My daughter Kelli and son-in-law Pete assisted with formatting, proof-reading and questioning the clarity of this paper. My mother Gerry was an encouraging angel who kept telling me how important this was. Lastly I dedicate this project to my Dad who believed in education, showed me the importance of reading and individual learning – but mostly always believed in me (passed away October 9, 2011). I will be eternally grateful for their love and many sacrifices they made in this journey with me. ii Table of Contents Table of Contents...................................... ……......................................................... iii List of Illustrations/Figures.......................................................................................... v List of Tables............................................................................................................... vi List of Appendix......................................................................................................... vii Abstract....................................................................................................................... viii Introduction................................................................................................................. 1 Literature Review......................................................................................................... 3 History.......................................................................................................................... 4 Research........................................................................................................................ 6 Articles.......................................................................................................................... 10 Blogs............................................................................................................................. 12 Courts and Jury Services............................................................................................... 12 Mandates and Principals............................................................................................... 15 Method......................................................................................................................... 16 Acknowledgement....................................................................................................... 17 Workload Information.................................................................................................. 18 Survey Design and Development................................................................................. 19 Results.......................................................................................................................... 25 Project Demographics.................................................................................................. 25 Tabulation of Results................................................................................................... 26 Stress Indicators and Outcomes................................................................................... 27 Quality Assurance Outcomes....................................................................................... 35 iii Comparative Data Outcomes...................................................................................... 43 Conclusion and Recommendations............................................................................. 46 References.................................................................................................................. 50 Appendices ............................................................................................................... 67 iv List of Illustrations/Figures Figure 1 North Dakota - Snohomish County Survey Comparable Questions... 7 Figure 2 Question Development North Dakota and Snohomish County.......... 21 Figure 3 Questions Related to Monthly Questionnaire.................................... 22 Figure 4 Questions Related to NCSC Jury Research Project............................ 23 Figure 5 Comparing Stress Levels of Jurors within Each Stage of Jury Service …………………………………………………………….. 28 Figure 6 Comparing Stress Level Averages of Jurors with Prior/No Service Experience for Each Stage …………………………………………. 31 Figure 7 Comparing Stress Level Averages of Jurors by Gender through Each Stage ……………………………………………………………….. 33 Figure 8 Findings Related to North Dakota Survey.......................................... 43 Figure 9 Findings Regarding Survey and Monthly Questionnaire.................... 45 Figure 10 Findings Related to NCSC Jury Research Project.............................. 46 Figure 11 Gender and Age Count of Jury Survey............................................... 60 Figure 12 Jury Survey indicating Prior Service separated by Gender................ 61 v List of Tables Table 1 Employment Concerns........................................................................ 35 Table 2 Child care and/or Elder care Concerns................................................ 35 Table 3 Stress related Life Disruption and to Trouble at Home...................... 36 Table 4 Responses to On-Line Jury Process.................................................... 36 Table 5 Employment Concerns....................................................................... 55 Table 6 Child care and/or Elder care Concerns............................................... 55 Table 7 Stress related to Life Disruption and Trouble at Home..................... 55 Table 8 Security and Personal Safety............................................................. 56 Table 9 ADA, Facility or Physical Comfort................................................... 56 Table 10 Court of Prior Service........................................................................ 62 Table 11 Jury Stress Related to Community Reaction.................................... 65 vi List of Appendices Appendix A: Juror Survey Cover Letter ……......................................................... 67 Appendix B: Post Jury Service Survey ………....................................................... 68 Appendix C: Jury Exit Questionnaire Summary Report............................................ 73 Appendix D: Comments and Suggestion – Jury Survey ........................................... 75 Appendix E: Juror Excel Numbers Computations .................................................... 81 Appendix F: Juror Exit Questionnaire Reports ......................................................... 85 Appendix G: Case Juror Activity Statistics (May – August)......................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NCJFCJ 2020 Legislative State Sheets
    Areas of Focus Domestic Child Sex Trafficking IN YOUR Improving outcomes for STATE vulnerable and victimized National Impact children through judicial education and action Washington 2020 National Judicial Institute on Domestic Violence Enhancing judicial skills to promote victim safety and • In 2019, the NCJFCJ fulfilled 60 requests for technical assistance. batterer accountability • In 2019, the NCJFCJ trained 78 judges, judicial officers, attorneys, and other juvenile and Juvenile Justice GPS family court-related professionals working to protect Washington’s children, families, Providing juvenile justice and victims in our communities. policy, practice, and statistics by state • The NCJFCJ conducted the first site launch meeting for the Firearms TA Project (FTAP) in Trauma-informed Courts & the Spokane. Participants engaged in a collaborative mapping process to identify barriers to Adolescent Brain obtaining firearms surrender by persons who are prohibited from possessing them. Promoting trauma-responsive • Washington judicial officers received training on the handling of domestic violence courts and practices informed by science cases and domestic child sex trafficking cases. Child Abuse & Neglect Institute • NCJFCJ staff provided two sessions at the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act Improving outcomes for (FVPSA) Tribal Grantee Meeting in Seattle. They presented “Overrepresentation & ICWA: abused and neglected children Best and Promising Practices for Tribal Grantees” and they guided a discussion/listening through dependency court best session entitled “Domestic Violence, Child Protection and Custody: Shared Experiences, practices Successes, and Challenges in Grant Implementation.” Resource Center on Domestic Violence: Child Protection & • As part of the Implementation Sites Project, the NCJFCJ provides targeted training and Custody technical assistance to the Thurston County Superior Court to improve the handling of Providing leadership on child abuse and neglect cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Commission on Judicial Conduct Annual Report for 2017
    State of Washington CommissionCommission onon Judicial Conduct Conduct 2017 Annual Report 2017 ANNUAL REPORT State of Washington COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT Commission Members* Alternate Members Richard Carlson, Chair John Sleeter Lin-Marie Nacht, Vice-Chair Elizabeth René Honorable John P. Erlick, Secretary Honorable Ruth Reukauf Robert Alsdorf Ryan Archer Sherry Appleton Terrie Ashby-Scott Joseph Bell Honorable James Verellen Honorable George Fearing Frances Bessermin Larry Goldberg Judie Stanton Connie Michener Michael Tate Honorable Margaret Vail Ross Honorable Kristian Hedine Jean Ryckman Dorothy Webster *Commission membership as of December 31, 2017 For a current list of Commission members, please refer to the Commission’s website. The following commissioners’ service ended during 2017: E.J. Juarez Honorable Jerry Roach P.O. Box 1817, Olympia, Washington 98507 (360) 753-4585 - Fax (360) 586-2918 www.cjc.state.wa.us cover art credit: Library of Congress (Edward Curtis - Wind Mountain) Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION . 1 II. THE WASHINGTON COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT 1. Goals . 1 2. Meetings . 1 3. Membership . 1 4. Member Biographies . 2 III. THE COMMISSION’S DISCIPLINARY FUNCTION 1. Jurisdiction and Authority . 8 2. The Complaint Process . 8 Stage I Preliminary Investigation Stage II Initial Proceedings Stage III Statement of Charges Stage IV Decision and Appeal Process 3. Confidentiality . 9 4. Public Case Information . 9 5. Ethics in Public Service Act . 9 6. Judicial Whistleblower Policy . 10 IV. COMMISSION ACTIVITY 1. Docket: Dismissal vs Sustainment . 12 2. Dispositions: Dismissal vs Sustainment . 13 3. Dispositions: Public . 13 4. Statistical Charts . 14 5. Public Actions - 2017 . 16 6. Public Actions - Previous Five Years .
    [Show full text]
  • A View from the Other Side of the Bench Shirley S
    Marquette Law Review Volume 69 Article 2 Issue 4 Summer 1986 A View From the Other Side of the Bench Shirley S. Abrahamson Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr Part of the Law Commons Repository Citation Shirley S. Abrahamson, A View From the Other Side of the Bench, 69 Marq. L. Rev. 463 (1986). Available at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr/vol69/iss4/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Marquette Law Review by an authorized administrator of Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MARQUETTE LAW REVIEW Volume 69 Summer 1986 No. 4 A VIEW FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BENCH* SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON** After serving on a jury, G.K. Chesterton wrote: Many legalists have declared that the untrained jury should be altogether supplanted by the trained judge .... The Fabian argument of the expert, that the man who is trained should be the man who is trusted would be absolutely unan- swerable if it were really true that a man who studied a thing and practised it every day went on seeing more and more of its significance. But he does not. He goes on seeing less and less of its significance .... .... [T]he horrible thing about all legal officials, even the best, about all judges, magistrates, barristers, detectives, and policemen, is not that they are wicked (some of them are good), not that they are stupid (several of them are quite intelligent), it is simply that they have got used to it ...
    [Show full text]
  • The Lady, Or the Tiger? a Field Guide to Metaphor & Narrative
    Scholarly Commons @ UNLV Boyd Law Scholarly Works Faculty Scholarship 2011 The Lady, or the Tiger? A Field Guide to Metaphor & Narrative Linda L. Berger University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub Part of the Legal Education Commons, Legal Writing and Research Commons, and the Other Law Commons Recommended Citation Berger, Linda L., "The Lady, or the Tiger? A Field Guide to Metaphor & Narrative" (2011). Scholarly Works. 663. https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/663 This Article is brought to you by the Scholarly Commons @ UNLV Boyd Law, an institutional repository administered by the Wiener-Rogers Law Library at the William S. Boyd School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BERGER_MACRO_FINAL 3/29/2011 1:03:25 PM The Lady, or the Tiger? A Field Guide to Metaphor and Narrative Linda L. Berger* We can no longer take language for granted as a medium of communication. Its transparency has gone. We are like people who for a long time looked out of a window without noticing the glass—and then one day began to notice this too.1 I. INTRODUCTION Metaphor and narrative reassure us that things hang together, providing a sense of coherence to the patterns and paths we employ for perception and expression. Without the metaphorical process that allows us to gather them up, group them together, and contain them, our perceptions would scatter like marbles thrown on the ground.2 Without the ability to tell stories that link discrete events together, place them into a storyline with a beginning and end, and compose a coherent accounting, our lives would be constructed of “One Damn Thing After Another.”3 In this field guide, I hope to illustrate—with images and stories when possible—how better understanding of metaphor and narrative can guide those engaged in legal rhetoric and persuasion.
    [Show full text]
  • Spokane County District Court 2017
    SPOKANE COUNTY DISTRICT COURT 2017 Honorable Patti Connolly Walker, Presiding; Honorable Debra Hayes; Honorable Richard Leland; Honorable Aimee Maurer; Honorable Vance Peterson; Honorable Jeffrey Smith; Honorable Donna Wilson Washington Court System THE SUPREME COURT Six-year terms, staggered • Appeals from the Court of Appeals • Administers state court system COURT OF APPEALS Six-year terms, staggered Division I, Seattle; Division II, Tacoma Division III, Spokane • Appeals from lower courts except those in jurisdiction of the Supreme Court SUPERIOR COURT Four-year terms • Civil matters • Domestic relations • Felony criminal cases • Juvenile matters • Appeals from courts of limited jurisdiction COURTS OF LIMITED JURISDICTION Four-year terms District and Municipal Courts • Misdemeanor criminal cases • Traffic, non-traffic and parking infractions • Domestic violence protection orders • Civil actions of $100,000 or less • Small claims up to $5,000 COURT ORGANIZATION Courts of Limited Jurisdiction Courts of limited jurisdiction include district and municipal courts. District courts are county courts and serve defined territories, both incorporated and unincorporated, within the counties. Municipal courts are those created by cities and towns. More than two million cases are filed annually in district and municipal courts. Excluding parking infractions, seven out of every eight cases filed in all state courts are filed at this level. This is due primarily to the broad jurisdiction these courts have over traffic violations and misdemeanors. District Courts District courts have jurisdiction over both criminal and civil cases. Criminal jurisdiction includes misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor cases that involve traffic or non-traffic offenses. Examples include: Driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs (DUI), reckless driving, driving with a suspended driver’s license and assault in the fourth degree.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021–2022 Bja Member Guide A
    2021–2022 BJA MEMBER GUIDE A Complete Member Guide to the Board for Judicial Administration 1 | PageBJA MEMBER GUIDE Table of Contents Welcome Letter ..................................................................................................................... 2 Washington Courts Organization ......................................................................................... 3 BJA Organization .................................................................................................................. 4 BJA Membership ................................................................................................................... 5 BJA Member Responsibilities .............................................................................................. 6 BJA Highlights....................................................................................................................... 7 BJA History ............................................................................................................................ 8 BJA Rules .............................................................................................................................11 Bylaws ..................................................................................................................................13 Committee Information Budget and Funding Committee ..................................................................................16 Court Education Committee .........................................................................................17
    [Show full text]
  • Media Guide Is Provided by the Board for Judicial Administration’S Public Trust and Confidence Committee
    About this guide This handbook is published to help journalists better understand Washington courts and the justice system. It is designed to provide an overview of the court system at all levels, as well as easily referenced information concerning court procedures, trials, appeals, ethics, access to records, a glossary of legal terms and a resource list. This handbook does not provide legal advice. When issues arise that require legal advice, reporters and others should consult with the appropriate legal practitioners. The content of this guide is for information only, not warranted as correct and is not a substitute for consultation with legal counsel. This media guide is provided by the Board for Judicial Administration’s Public Trust and Confidence Committee. We appreciate the help of the New Jersey Press Association in compiling information for the guide. This guide contains practical tips on ways to retrieve public information from the court system. The tips have been provided or approved by experienced journalists and are for information purposes only. They are based solely upon the experiences of reporters and are not intended to substitute for the advice of your editor or your news agency’s attorney. Look for this icon throughout the guide for helpful links to key online resources. Table of Contents FRAMEWORK .....................................................................................................4 United States ...................................................................................................... 5
    [Show full text]
  • Judges' Perspectives on Stress and Safety in the Courtroom
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association American Judges Association 2009 Judges’ Perspectives on Stress and Safety in the Courtroom: An Exploratory Study David M. Flores University of Nevada - Reno Monica K. Miller University of Nevada - Reno, [email protected] Jared Chamberlain Argosy University - Phoenix Campus James T. Richardson University of Nevada - Reno, [email protected] Brian H. Bornstein University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ajacourtreview Flores, David M.; Miller, Monica K.; Chamberlain, Jared; Richardson, James T.; and Bornstein, Brian H., "Judges’ Perspectives on Stress and Safety in the Courtroom: An Exploratory Study" (2009). Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association. 293. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ajacourtreview/293 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the American Judges Association at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Judges’ Perspectives on Stress and Safety in the Courtroom: An Exploratory Study David M. Flores, Monica K. Miller, Jared Chamberlain, James T. Richardson, & Brian H. Bornstein he courtroom represents a critical component of the injured,4 or killed5 while on the job. Some judges have also American justice system. The legal system asks judges experienced violence outside of the courtroom; for instance, in Tand juries to deliver justice for injured parties through 2005, a man killed U.S. District Judge Joan Lefkow’s husband the cases that they decide.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Washington Commission on Judicial Conduct
    State of Washington Commission on Judicial Conduct 2018 Annual Report 2018 ANNUAL REPORT State of Washington COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT Commission Members* Alternate Members Lin-Marie Nacht, Chair Elizabeth René Robert Alsdorf, Vice-Chair Ryan Archer Honorable John P. Erlick, Secretary Honorable Ruth Reukauf Sherry Appleton Terrie Ashby-Scott Joseph Bell Frances Bessermin Richard Carlson Ramon Alvarez Larry Goldberg Judie Stanton Honorable Kristian Hedine Honorable Claire Bradley Connie Michener Michael Tate Jean Ryckman VACANT Honorable James Verellen Honorable Richard Melnick *Commission membership as of December 31, 2018 For a current list of Commission members and biographies please refer to the Commission’s website at www.cjc.state.wa.us The following commissioners’ service ended during 2018: Honorable George Fearing Honorable Margaret Vail Ross John Sleeter Dorothy Webster P.O. Box 1817, Olympia, Washington 98507 (360) 753-4585 - Fax (360) 586-2918 www.cjc.state.wa.us cover art credit: https://unsplash.com/photos/xZdLUzuxnVY (John Westrock - Cape Disappointment) Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION . 1 II. THE WASHINGTON COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT 1. Goals . 1 2. Meetings . 1 3. Membership . 1 4. Members and Alternates . 2 III. THE COMMISSION’S DISCIPLINARY FUNCTION 1. Jurisdiction and Authority . 4 2. The Complaint Process . 4 Stage I Preliminary Investigation Stage II Initial Proceedings Stage III Statement of Charges Stage IV Decision and Appeal Process 3. Confidentiality . 5 4. Public Case Information . 5 IV. COMMISSION ACTIVITY 1. Inquiries . 7 2. Complaints . 7 3. Dispositions . 7 4. Statistical Charts . 8 5. Public Actions - 2018 . 10 6. Public Actions - Previous Five Years . 11 7. Cases Filed with Supreme Court .
    [Show full text]
  • We the People of the State of Washington Grateful to the Supreme
    PREAMBLE We the people of the State Reportof Washington of the Courts of Washington grateful to the 2005 - 2006 Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain \this constitution. Index of Articles Letter from Washington Supreme Court Chief Justice Justice In Jeopardy: Funding System Established in 1889 No Longer Ensures Justice for Washington Residents 1 Amnesty Programs Help Courts and Residents Get Back on Track 7 Civil Legal Aid Is No Longer a “Charity” Within the Justice System 8 Rare Historical Court Convened to Examine Conviction and Hanging 10 Jury Video Updated After 18 Years of Perry Mason 12 New Supreme Court Commission Works to Help Children in Foster Care 13 Open Access to Court Records Clarified in New and Revised Court Rules 16 Improving Public Trust in the Courts Takes Action 18 Open Justice: Cameras in Courtrooms Get Needed Clarity 20 Modernization of Court Information System is Improving Efficiency 21 Letter From washington supreme court chief justice On behalf of our state’s judiciary it is my pleasure to present the 2005 - 2006 Report of the Courts of Washington. As you will find throughout this report Washington courts are undergoing great change. From advances in trial court PREAMBLEoperations to our plans for modernizing our statewide court information system, our courts continue to evolve and modernize in the quest to better provide We the peopleequal justice for all.of the This report offers a glimpse into the major initiatives and achievements of State of Washingtonthe judicial branch of government in the past two years. Comprehensive caseload information on the work of grateful tothe courtsthe is also available online at www.courts.wa.gov.
    [Show full text]
  • Juror Stress Debriefing: a Review of the Literature and an Evaluation of a Yukon Program
    JUROR STRESS DEBRIEFING: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE AND AN EVALUATION OF A YUKON PROGRAM 2008 CanLIIDocs 145 Submitted to: Yukon Department of Justice Submitted by: Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family Prepared by: Lorne D. Bertrand, Ph.D., Joanne J. Paetsch, B.A., and Sanjeev Anand, LL.M., Ph.D. March 2008 2008 CanLIIDocs 145 The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Yukon Justice or the Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family. CONTENTS List of Tables and Figures................................................................................................................v Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................... vii Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... ix 1.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................1 1.1 Background..............................................................................................................1 1.1.1 Project Components.....................................................................................1 2008 CanLIIDocs 145 1.2 Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................2 1.3 Organization of the Report.......................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Juror Stress Debriefing: a Review of the Literature and an Evaluation of a Yukon Program
    University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Research Centres, Institutes, Projects and Units Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family 2008 Juror Stress Debriefing: A Review of the Literature and an Evaluation of a Yukon Program Bertrand, L.D.; Paetsch, J.J.; Anand, S. Yukon Department of Justice. Bertrand, L.D, Paetsch, J.J., Anand, S. (2008). Juror Stress Debriefing: A Review of the Literature and an Evaluation of a Yukon Program. Whitehorse, YK: Yukon Department of Justice. http://hdl.handle.net/1880/107277 report Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca JUROR STRESS DEBRIEFING: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE AND AN EVALUATION OF A YUKON PROGRAM Submitted to: Yukon Department of Justice Submitted by: Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family Prepared by: Lorne D. Bertrand, Ph.D., Joanne J. Paetsch, B.A., and Sanjeev Anand, LL.M., Ph.D. March 2008 The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Yukon Justice or the Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family. CONTENTS List of Tables and Figures................................................................................................................v Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................... vii Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... ix 1.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]