Sweet jesus, now I have to get a job. Sadly, it seems that the “credit crunch” has significantly effected development (or at least new jobs in the archaeology sector) in the UK so I will be returning to Canada. If I had EU status, it wouldn’t matter but given that I have to spend a hundred pounds just to stay on with a work visa I think its becoming too financially taxing. From the sounds of things the mythical “archaeology factory” is still running strong in Alberta, a Canadian province, economical, drunk with oil (they have more oil than Iraq does but please don't tell our Yankee neighbors). Ok the “archaeology factory” is kind of an inside joke which mocks the job instability and unpredictable nature of professional archaeology.

I am now looking for, an archaeology-based, job until November.

If anyone is interested here is the abstract from my thesis.

This paper is composed of three sections. The first section will discuss the advantages of employing geophysics surveys on military sites followed by an assessment of the role geophysics fills within the context of other techniques employed by archaeologists. The second section will discuss the advantages of studying war graves and then will employ published geophysics surveys to assess the ability of the three most widely used geophysical techniques (resistivity, magnetics and ground-penetrating radar) to detect war graves. The third section will employ published geophysical surveys to provide examples of different features that can be detected on military and conflict sites from prehistoric times to the modern era.

If you are one of the hundred or so people around the world who is knee deep in geophysics and would like to learn more about my topic just ask and I can fire off a PDF copy of my dissertation. With feedback from the internal and external markers, I can polish that puppy up and perhaps publish it in one form or another.

Just as you look at the ingredients of some foods, you surely want to look at the ingredients (and past) of your lawyer who will handle affairs concerning the most important parts of your life ?

Well here is an article today which might just interest readers so inclined to question their solicitor’s service record before committing themselves to a possibly horrendous experience they may never be able to recover from ….

In two announcements today by the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman, the Law Society is criticised for their almost routine policy of 'not following' the Ombudsman's recommendations concerning two complaints, one a complicated family matter involving guardianship & the transfer of titles, and the other involving a fairly straightforward winding up of a deceased's estate.

The Legal Services Ombudsman, Jane Irvine, who will soon go on to her new post as the Chairman of the new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, was critical in two of her reports of the Law Society of Scotland in their poor handling & regulation of both complaints which were reported to the Ombudsman’s office for further investigation.

Unfortunately, due to the demands of the legal profession, neither the complainers, or the legal firms involved in the complaints can be identified, making it highly probable, other clients may or already have fell victim to the same legal firms in similar or other issues which have went on to generate complaints.

The lack of identification of those legal firms and solicitors involved in what appear to be very serious illustrate the problems of informing and warning the public of crooked legal firms in Scotland.

If you can get through the Mrs X, Mr Y and various letters of the alphabet such as "T" assigned to represent the unidentified firms of rogue lawyers, then perhaps the notices may make some sense in their content.

However, from my own experience in issuing reports on how crooked a firms of lawyers are, or how corrupt the Law Society of Scotland has been in protecting a firm of crooked lawyers against a client complaint, it is much better to name and shame the legal firm and the solicitor concerned, not only to assist the poor client who has already been ripped off, but also to protect and warn the rest of us, and any potential clients of what this legal firm or solicitor has been doing to other clients.

Regulatory disclosure of all solicitors and legal firms, as I have written before, must be made mandatory to all prospective clients before they sign up a legal firm or solicitor to represent their interests. It is perhaps the ultimate level of consumer protection which must be applied in the circumstances of dealing with one's legal affairs, often the most important parts of your lives.

You can read my earlier article on regulatory disclosure here : Disclosing the regulatory history of lawyers in Scotland to help give choice to the consumer

Lets hope the new Scottish Legal Complaints Commission will be more effective in their investigation of client complaints against crooked lawyers and enforcement of the necessary action. However, as the SLCC is to be staffed by the Law Society of Scotland, perhaps they wont be as effective as promised by the Legal Profession & Legal Aid Act (Scotland) 2007.. and whose fault is that Mr Justice Secretary MacAskill ?

You can read more about the problems of the ‘independent’ Scottish Legal Complaints Commission here : Scottish Legal Complaints Commission - a mission of failure before it begins

The notices from the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman follow :

Monday, 8 September 2008

Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman Notices :

Section 34A of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions)(Scotland) Act 1990

Failure of the Law Society of Scotland [LSS] to comply with a recommendation from the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman arising out of an Opinion by the Ombudsman on the Law Society’s handling of a complaint.

Factual background and Ombudsman’s recommendation

Mrs X, Mrs Y and Mrs Z went to the solicitors T, for advice about applying for guardianship of Mr X [Mrs X’s son] and to transfer the titles to Mrs X’s house into the names of Mrs Y and Mrs Z. The house had originally been bought in Mrs X and Mr X’s names.

The solicitors T failed to secure guardianship of Mr X. Mrs X, Mrs Y and Mrs Z therefore instructed another firm of solicitors H in this matter.

The LSS investigated 11 complaints of inadequate professional service against the firm of solicitors T and one complaint of professional misconduct against an individual named solicitor in that firm. The LSS upheld 6 complaints of inadequate professional service. The LSS decided to take no action in relation to the other 5 inadequate professional service complaints and the complaint about professional misconduct.

Mr Y complained to me on behalf of Mrs X, Mrs Y and Mrs Z about the LSS’s handling of their complaint and in particular that it was guardianship of Mr X that his family wanted and that they had instructed the solicitor accordingly.

Following my investigation, I concluded that I was critical of the manner in which the LSS had reached its decision in relation to Issues 1, part of 7 and 9. I was not persuaded or satisfied with the reasoning provided by the LSS in respect of these issues. I therefore recommended that the LSS reconsider all of these issues.

In relation to Issue 1 – I found that Mrs X, Mrs Y and Mrs Z had plainly and clearly asked the solicitors by letter to represent them in gaining guardianship of Mr X and this had not happened. There had been a failure to carry out an instruction. I recommended that the LSS should reconsider this complaint and provide detailed reasoning for its decision.

Regarding Issue 7 – I did not think that the LSS had provided clear reasoning in reaching its decision in relation to this complaint. The LSS had upheld Issue 5 which looked at the solicitors’ failure to provide the complainers with clear advice and instructions as to the format of the medical reports required and how to obtain these. Issue 7 looked at the failure to identify and approach the appropriate medical practitioners directly. I did not think that that the LSS had provided sufficient detailed reasoning in relation to identifying appropriate medical practitioners. In relation to Issue 5, the LSS had concluded that there was an obligation on the solicitors to ensure that the complainers were aware of the terms of the Act. I thought this should apply equally to this complaint.

In relation to Issue 9, I considered that the LSS had given too much weight to one piece of evidence and felt that there was in fact no evidence of what had or had not been said during a meeting.

I also recommended that the LSS pay Mr Y compensation and costs for the stress and inconvenience caused by the LSS’s inadequate investigation.

The LSS’s reasons for not accepting the Ombudsman’s recommendations

The LSS considered my recommendations and did not consider that it was necessary to accept the recommendations.

In the LSS’s view, the Committee had provided comprehensive reasons for its decisions and, in particular, why it had departed from the Reporter. The LSS said that the Committee’s reasons were sustainable. They were not perverse, illogical or clearly wrong. The LSS was not persuaded that the points made by the Ombudsman were so fundamental that the decisions reached by the Committee ought to be disturbed. The LSS was also content that the decisions were properly explained.

Issue 1 – The LSS said that the phrase “Guardianship” was legally meaningless. The LSS said that what could be sought was either a Financial Guardian, Welfare Guardian or both. The LSS went on to explain that such a Guardian was appointed by the Court and it was a specific person who was appointed. Accordingly, to say that a number of people wanted Guardianship, was, in legal terms meaningless. Accordingly, to say that the solicitors had plain and clear instructions regarding Guardianship could not be correct. The LSS said that as the term did not make sense in law, they were therefore not clear instructions. The Committee did not consider that the solicitor could be criticised for not doing something which could not be achieved in law. The LSS stated that what the Committee had done was to look behind the issue and note that at the root of the complainer’s concerns was the transfer of the title of the property.

It was the LSS’s view that on the instructions the solicitors had, they exercised their professional judgement that in order to obtain what the complainers were really after was best done by way of an Intervention Order and the Committee considered that this was a reasonable exercise of judgement.

Issue 7 – Again, the LSS did not understand why the Ombudsman did not totally follow the Committee’s reasoning in relation to this issue. The Committee noted that the solicitors agreed with the complainers that the complainers should approach the medical practitioners as a cost saving measure. The LSS wanted to emphasise that there was an agreement that the complainers would do this and the solicitors could not be criticised for failing to identify and approach when it had been agreed otherwise in order to (a) save money and (b) the complainers would know whom to approach as treatment was already being given.

The LSS noted that I had made reference to Issue 5. The LSS commented that there was a difference between Issues 5 and 7 in that the identification of the doctors was a different issue from giving the doctors clear information as to the form of the medical report required to satisfy the Court.

Issue 9 – The LSS stated that it was for the Committee to assess the evidence. There was conflicting evidence from the parties as to what happened. The other two pieces of evidence were, firstly, the £500 payment to account and secondly, the fact that the file was silent. The Committee regarded the latter issue as neutral. The Committee considered that the payment of £500 was a factor to be weighed up in the balance. It was accepted that it did not prove that the solicitors told them, but it was supportive of the solicitors’ position.

The LSS did not accept that the payment was an irrelevant factor; rather it was one factor to be weighed in the balance. It did not prove that the solicitor did not do something, but it was supportive of their position and the Committee were entitled to decide the weight to be attached. The LSS said that if this matter was considered irrelevant then all the Committee would have been left with was two conflicting views and a silent file and would not have been able to uphold the issue because of lack of evidence.

The LSS was content that the decision reached was reasonable and reasonably explained.

The Ombudsman’s view

I was concerned that the LSS had missed the crux of Mrs X, Mrs Y and Mrs Z’s complaint in relation to Issue 1. Put simply the complainants had asked the solicitors to do something for them and this was not carried out. The LSS had attempted to look behind the request and had not upheld the complaint on this basis. If a specific instruction has been given to a firm of solicitors, a client would expect this to be acted upon and if there was a problem with the instruction as given, I would expect the solicitors to explain this to the client and explain what they are able to do. This was the complaint that the LSS agreed to investigate and is the issue that the LSS has side stepped.

In relation to Issue 7, I accept that the complainants had agreed to approach the medical practitioners themselves as a cost saving mechanism. There should have been a duty on the solicitors to ensure that the complainants knew exactly who to contact. The Act is specific regarding the qualifications required by the medical practitioner completing the form and this was not something that the solicitors explained to Mrs X, Mrs Y and Mrs Z. The LSS has already upheld the complaint that the solicitors failed to provide the complainers with clear advice and instructions as to the format of the medical reports required. The Committee stated that the solicitor had an obligation to ensure that the complainants were aware of the required terms of the Act. Applying this same logic, it would appear equally that the solicitors failed to provide the complainers with clear advice in relation to the appropriate medical practitioners to approach as this was also a specific requirement under the Act. I do not think that the LSS has looked at this complaint consistently and in line with the other complaints that it has already decided.

Regarding Issue 9 – I think that too much weight was given to the fact that £500 was paid on account. I do not think that this shows one way or another whether the solicitors told the complainants about civil legal aid. I think that the LSS could have simply stated that there was insufficient evidence to uphold this complaint rather than attaching so much importance to the £500.

Jane Irvine
Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman
http://www.slso.org.uk/
_________________________________

Case No.2

Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman

Section 34A of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1990

Failure of the Law Society of Scotland to comply with a recommendation from the Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman arising out of an Opinion by the Ombudsman on the Law Society’s handling of a complaint.

Background and Ombudsman’s recommendation

Following the death of the complainer’s husband, the complained of firm of solicitors handled the administration of his estate. The complainer complained of a lack of information from the solicitors which put her in difficult circumstances.

The complaint has been considered by the LSS. The LSS decided not to investigate some of to the issues raised and subsequently closed its complaint file when it appeared the complainer had abandoned the complaint.

When I examined the matter although concluding the LSS handled the complaint in a generally satisfactory manner, I was concerned at the speed with which the decision was taken to close the complaint file. Part of that concern was that the complainer may not be familiar enough with the British system to manoeuvre her way through it at a particularly distressing time. I had observed the LSS Sifting Panel’s comments that further information should be sought on the solicitors’ alleged failure to communicate with the client. In light of those comments I recommended the LSS consider whether to provide the complainer with another opportunity to give the LSS the information it had requested. I considered it reasonable for the LSS to set a clear time limit to receiving that information.

As I considered the speed of decision to close the complaint file had inconvenienced the complainer I recommended the LSS should pay her £25 in compensation and £10 towards the cost of bringing her complaint to me.

The LSS’s reasons for not accepting the Ombudsman’s recommendations.

The LSS does not accept my recommendations. Its stated view is that the Ombudsman had recognised the LSS provided the complainer with a letter stating clearly if she did not respond within 14 days then the file would be closed. The complainer was not in touch within that period and the file was then closed. The question then arises as to whether the LSS ought reasonably to have adjusted its process to take account of any special circumstances pertaining to the complainer. The Ombudsman had suggested two such circumstances that the complainer might not be familiar with “the British System” and secondly that she was going through a distressing time.

The LSS stated has two sources of information to indicate that understanding English or a “British system” was not an issue for the complainer. She had stated she was not a native English speaker but thought her level good enough. The LSS said the standard of correspondence from the complainer was very good.

If the LSS treated all non British people differently or automatically adjusted its process without due cause then that could be seen as discrimination in itself. In the LSS’s view each situation required to be looked at objectively in order to form a reasonable conclusion. In this case the complainer had not indicated she had any special needs and it was reasonable and supportable that her English was not at a level where it would be a barrier thus requiring an adjustment to the process. The LSSS had taken advice from its Head of Diversity in reaching this considered view.

The LSS noted the Ombudsman’s second contention was that the complainer was suffering a distressing time. That was sadly very much the case. It was also very unfortunately often the case for many complainers if not nearly all to be in a distressing situation upon contacting the LSS. Often the reason they have contacted a solicitor is because they have suffered a distressing life event. It is therefore doubly distressing to have to require to make a complaint on top of that.

There was in the LSS’s view no good reason why it required to adjust its process to take account of the complainer’s situation.

Ombudsman’s view

I considered the LSS response had failed to address the concerns I had identified and had concluded that when linked together amounted to circumstances that merited the LSS contacting the complainer for further information albeit with a very specific deadline.

I had drawn the LSS’s attention to the specific but linked difficulties i.e. by implication the exceptional circumstances the complainer faced. I considered the LSS’s response separated these concerns, appearing to examine them as unrelated matters.

I had referred to the complainer’s knowledge of “the British System” but there was however no special pleading with regard to her knowledge of the English language which is how the LSS had interpreted that reference. The problems identified were in relation to how solicitors carry out their functions and how the Inland Revenue operates. Both of these are to do with the legal and tax systems in Scotland and Britain.

The other linked concern I highlighted was in relation to the complainer’s personal circumstances. I agreed many complainers who approach the LSS experience similar and no doubt even more distressing circumstances. The complainer’s situation was cited as only one of the concerns I had identified. I had also set my recommendation in the context of the view of a LSS Sifting Panel that the complainer should be asked for further information on the solicitors’ alleged failure to communicate with her.

I confirmed my appreciation the LSS’s 14 day time limit for replies from complainers can move things on successfully. I had however in the past identified a concern which continues in light of this LSS response with the differing time limits allowed to complainers and to complained of solicitors.

The matters I had identified gave me enough concern to recommend the reconsideration by the LSS of its decision. Those matters were deliberately linked in the recommendation to underline that view.

The LSS second response

In its response to my views the LSS confirmed it adhered to its initial response. The LSS felt it had acted fairly albeit appreciating the complainer in common with many others found herself in highly distressing circumstances.

Ombudsman’s conclusions

This is a complaint which raises issues of the use of reasonableness when examining all a complainer’s circumstances relevant to a complaint. My view remains that in this case it is not a matter of language but of a lack of familiarity with both the legal and the tax systems in Scotland. The LSS is also aware that I consider time limits are necessary and important to a complaints process and hence why I took care to specify in the recommendation that it was reasonable for the LSS to set a clear time limit to receiving that information. However as the time limit for a complainer is 14 days rather than the 21 days statutory time limit for solicitors, I consider that a tight deadline and in particular not that long when it the result is to exclude someone from a complaint process. I agree with the LSS that complaints have to be managed and setting time limits is an important part of that process. However it is a very serious step to throw a complaint out of a complaint system leaving a lay complainer nowhere else to go - save court and so I consider these cases very seriously.

My conclusion remains that the complainer’s circumstances when taken as a whole merited the LSS using the flexibility available to it to give one final and limited opportunity for the complainer to provide the information the LSS required. I concluded in simply adhering to its formal response the LSS has failed to appreciate and therefore give appropriate consideration to the actual terms of my recommendation.

Jane Irvine
Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman
http://www.slso.org.uk/

First of all, Michael Portillo, former Conservative minister has come out in favour of LIT.

"Having thought hard about local government finance, I am convinced that an income tax supplement must be part of any equitable local tax system. I admit that earners would pay more and high earners much more, but greater social justice is not a powerful argument against it.

More importantly, raising the money in that way would enable local government to grow in scope and importance. By comparison with almost every country I know, we suffer from chronically weak local government and from central government that is too powerful. Decisions are made remotely, national policies are imposed although they are inappropriate in most localities and terrible amounts of public money get wasted."

And now even Labour bloggers are starting to argue in favour.

And even some Greens argue for LIT.

And if English bloggers are starting to favour LIT for England, could this tempt Gordon Brown into another U-turn?

As a boy, I used to play soccer on a red gravel football field. They still exist and you can see them all over Scotland wherever local schools have soccer fields. The gravel was the color of Tennessee red clay and when it was wet, which was usually every second day in Scotland, it stained my clothing and caused my mom to have a fit.

It was a great surface to play on because the bounce that it gave the football was terrific. Controlling the ball was difficult and the game was always played at a fierce rate. Most of my sprint skills were learned on a soccer pitch. However, there was one almighty drawback about playing on the pitch. When you were tripped up by another player or fell to your knees, the red gravel would cut through the skin, gashing your knees and filling the wound with small gravel stones. The pain was excruciating at times, but most players got up, laughed it off, and kept on playing with ‘skint’ knees.

After such an incident, I dreaded going home; not because I was worried about the mess of my clothes, but I was anxious about how my mom would treat my wounded knees. She would wash them with a hot cloth, and then painfully take out the small stones with tweezers. Finally, came the most agonizing moment when she would apply antiseptic to the wound. That would usually make me jump with pain and I would limp to my bedroom, vowing that I would never let her do that to me again. Nevertheless, within a couple of days, I would have to go through the same painful process.

Psalm 145:14  The Lord upholds all who are falling, and raises up all who are bowed down.

Sometimes when we fall in life, it’s hard to get up and painful to recover. We all make foolish decisions and fall prey to temptation. We have to live with consequences of our stupidity and sinfulness, but we do not have to be defined by them. The Lord, who watches over us, is willing to help us get back on our feet by forgiving our sins, healing our brokenness, and restoring our lives. It may be emotionally painful for a while and we may have to experience shame and contrition, embarrassment and rebuke for a time, but in the end if we are truly repentant and deeply sorry, God will raise us up through the cleansing blood of Christ.

Prayer:                        Lord God, we are imperfect, impetuous, and impertinent. We cause others hurt and humiliation, disappointment and dread. Forgive us for being so self-centered and sinful. Teach us the ways of contrition and sorrow, repentance and restoration.  Grant us this through our Lord Jesus Christ, our Savior and Healer. Amen.

More photos from urban Scotland. Cause sometimes you get tired of castles.

I have often said that I went to my last call as an evangelist. But I left as a pastor. And today confirmed it. So I pray that I bring that heart of a pastor to the work God has called me to now. For moments of ministry now are forming new bonds. May they too never be broken.

A note on the graphic for this entry: I saw a print of this remarkable painting by the great Aberdeenshire artist, Joseph Farquharson. The painting, "The shortening winter's day is near a close" (1903, © Lady Lever Art Gallery, National Museums Liverpool), was hanging in the pastor's study as I prepared to preach this day. I have no doubt that my heart was cultivated by my study of the painting before I went out to preach this morning. But bringing the food of Word, Sacrament and Prayer to the sheep of Christ, in their week-in-and week-out winters of life, is a privilege and the happy burden of every pastor. 

Andy Murray vient de réaliser un énorme exploit, assurément le plus grand de sa jeune carrière: il a sorti le n°1 mondial Rafael Nadal pour accéder à sa première finale de Grand Chelem. C'est donc au terme du deuxième jour de leur combat que les deux hommes sont parvenus à se départager (6-2 7-6 2-3 en faveur de Murray au moment du retour des joueurs sur le court).

Après un troisième set assez aisément remporté par Nadal, qui avait fait le break le jour précédent, pour ramener le score à deux sets à un, le véritable match débute. Et quel match ! Le deuxième jeu du quatrième set, long d'un quart d'heure, voit Murray dominer puis trembler pour finir par galvauder pas moins de 7 balles de break (l'Ecossais finira le match à 4 balles de break converties sur 20 obtenues) ! L'Espagnol le breake dans la foulée sur un jeu blanc et on se dit que le pauvre Murray doit être bien assommé. Mais il n'en est rien. Le natif de Dunblane parvient à recoller à 3-3 en allant chercher des ressources mentales insoupçonnées.

Depuis ce moment, on se rend coup pour coup sur le central Arthur Ashe. La bataille est superbe. On sent que Murray est tennistiquement supérieur avec son jeu tout en variations, ses retours de feu et son revers capable de faire la différence dans la diagonale contre le coup droit de Nadal (!), mais le roc de Manacor, même s'il commence à se fissurer quelque peu, s'accroche à ses formidables ressources physiques et mentales pour retarder l'inéluctable.

Et l'inéluctable arrive dans le dixième jeu. Murray obtient une balle de match au terme d'un échange à couper le souffle, faisant visiter tout Manhattan à son adversaire au bord de la rupture. Après une série de frappes énormes, dont chacune aurait eu le poids d'un coup gagnant contre tout autre joueur que ce diable de Nadal, le Britannique peut enfin conclure d'une volée facile. Le public, bien que majoritairement acquis à la cause de Nadal (allez savoir pourquoi), chavire. Un point plus tard, c'est la délivrance pour l'héritier de Tim Henman. L'élève vient de dépasser le maître: il la tient sa finale de Grand Chelem. Et Federer n'a qu'à bien se tenir. Ce jeune homme de 21 ans ne s'en laissera pas conter.

Well, I'm 46 and I've been a member of Dundas Parks for 9 years.

The weather was grim.

The course played tough.

But I ground out, not my best medal score ever today but, my best placed finish.

OK it was a so what 12th.  But if you were as familiar with last place as I am you'd be pretty chuffed about that.

I am.

Did you see that?  Did you?

He's the real deal. and that's official becuase an American said so.

his destructio of Naal was quite wonderful to watch.

unless of couse you'd backed him to win in 5 sets, not 4.

Like I did.

Now I've mentioned before his slight confusion over his sexuality. I've known this for years, my mother knew even before I was born & honestly, it's never really been an issue. Until now. So, what I may not have mentioned is the fact he has a young man (22 years old) from the Philippines coming over to stay with him in November. My father's wife knows & is fine with it - as I would hope so since he will be staying in her house. In-fact, while we're on her, I may as well shock you all by saying again how she can email him but not me. Yes I know, shock horror.

So this guy is in the process of applying for a Visa to come here. Apparently all of his friends have been telling him not to come. My father could "murder him, traffic him, rape him, anything!". My dad tells me this as though it's blasphemy, to which I replied that those were the exact words he used when Bear & I were planning to meet for the first time.

Anyway, the point of this post? This evening, my father tells me the following:

[22:19:36] -----@btinternet.com says:
I got a really good deal on travel to London where we'll stay with Ian and Nick and it's only £14 train fare each way
[22:20:04] -----@btinternet.com says:
but I had to book right away and take the dates offered which are 7th to 15th November
[22:20:13] -----@btinternet.com says:
so I will miss your last week here

Well shit me a coconut, isn't that a fathers love in action right there.

Obviously he isn't bothered by the notion that I'll be living in America & won't be coming back any time soon. It's fucking unbelievable with these people I swear, they are so out of touch with reality & with me. I'm speechless, I mean, what the hell am I supposed to even say to this?

I mean he's going on about some Muslim guy in the fucking Philippines who's angling for a ticket & a job here so he doesn't get "stoned to death if his homosexuality is found out" - his words, not mine by the way so don't hold me to that. But really, is he coming over for a holiday or is my father fucking adopting him?!!

My father is supposed to be thousands in debt, cannot afford the airfare to come to my wedding & wants me to apologize to his wife because it causes him "undue stress". Well you know what, evidently he can pony up for this kid, fly him over & pay the bills while he's here, but can't even be there for me on my last week here, even when we had our own plans!

So fuck him. Fuck it. I'm done.

'uppercuts dalstonian pro-folkers displaying a honky-tonk transcendence crossed with elements of an unnamed canadian house mogul, reminiscent of seventies pre-genesis prog. melodies so horizontal it sounds like their mothers were dropping acid with love during the recording of forever changes. songs: ohio meets loose fur meets your face. disclaimer: this will transport you back to the womb.'

you have to listen to this.

Copyright © 2008 WrappedUpInBooksBlog. All rights reserved.

Actor Marcin Mroczek and professional dancer Edyta Herbus won the Eurovision Dance Contest title held in Glasgow, Scotland.

Winner: Poland - Eurovision Dance Contest 2008

Apparently Bear was headed home down an alley, when he admired the dog of a passer by who evidently didn't want him anymore.

This poor soul has evidently been through the mill & it looks like he's been in a few dog fights too. He has a good amount of wounds all over him. It breaks my heart. The poor fellow has an actual hole in his ear. He's been so mistreated it makes me feel ashamed to be human. What these people have done to him is abhorrent, I'm disgusted.

On that note, I'll tell you it's an America Pit bull (Terrier maybe?). I don't know about over there but Pit Bulls have a pretty bad rap in the UK. A lot of it is sensationalism but it doesn't stop me from being nervous. I have known the breed & haven't had any bad encounters but needless to say I'm a little concerned. He seems very kind natured & obedient from what we've seen so far, but it's just not the as knowing your dog & bringing him up from a puppy is it.

But either way, Bear wasn't about to let this guy hand him over to the pound. He's at least going to get a chance at having a loving home - it's probably not going to be permanent with us but like I said there wasn't a snowballs chance in hell of him being abandoned again. Just to get him out of that bastards possession is enough for me.

Funny thing is, he's massive but he's scared of Rocky. I would be too mind you but there you go. Little does he know of the evil that lurks under the bed. She who growls so loud I can hear her through Bears microphone ten feet away.

I'm so glad I'm not there, otherwise we'd be keeping him for sure. He just needs some TLC, a whole lot of feedin' & a trip to the Vets asap!!

I wish I could post some photo's but unfortunately, I'm not there, as you know - & I have the camera (& Bear's web-cam sucks).

However, I'll be sure to keep you updated!

We went to see this on Friday night,  It was the Scottish debut of a new version of Romeo and Juliet, written by Joy Ardy and A W Milburn and it was performed by the Lothian Youth Arts and Musicals Company.

It was magic.

I'm close to youth theatre as a result of my FCT connections and we 'youth theatrists' have a snooty way of dismissing others, especially those in our back yard - but I honestly thought this was a great piece of theatre.

The Script/score/libretto is excellent merging, as it does, modern rock/pop with digestible tracts of Wm Shakespeare's original dialogue.

The music is particularly excellent, which is saying something if you see a musical 'cold'.

The group were outstanding too.  It's the first time I've seen a Lothian Youth show and the first big impact was the size of the cast.  Huge.  72 I reckon.  But the large stage of Edinburgh's Churchill Theatre just about coped.

The performances of all the principals were excellent but a few points need made.

Firstly, their age (many were 21) made the performances more mature and I think it was important that they could get their heads round the heavily skewed Shakespearian content.

Secondly, Mercutio and Benvolio were HILARIOUS.  I honestly never thought I'd say that about anything Shakespearaen, but they really nailed the humour of the parts and the directors must take some credit for that.

Lastly, both Romeo ( Craig Young) and Juliet ( Alison Corbett) were outstanding.  In particular Craig Young who is a major talent.

One negative point.  I didn't like the costumes.  Uninspiring and random.

I will certainly attend future Lothian Youth productions as it was a great night out.

As everyone knows, the UK's currency is anything but cheap. We're trying to stay out of the pound while living on the pound, so our first mode of attack is cheap liquor. As we're both delighted with cider (not the kind your mom used to give you in autumn), we thought we'd start here first.

While in Fort William we made the amazing discovery that Tesco (a UK grocery chain) sells their own brand of alcohol. Lucky for us, this includes cider. Priced at about 49 pence per can (Strongbow, our favourite, was about 80 pence or so -- I've already forgotten the exact price), it stands at 5.3% alcohol/volume. Anyway, this cider definitely was the cheapo incarnate of Strongbow itself. It's dry and not too sweet, and even good enough that when I woke up with a little headache this morning, I forgot that I had even drank the stuff last night. If I can access a Tesco, I'll buy this stuff in Aberdeen. We both hope that it's sold by the 12-pack or so to make it an even more economical decision. Ranking: 4 pints out of 5.

Now we're in Inverness (remember MacBeth?) and we're test-driving Frosty Jack's Cider, which was on sale for £2.75/4 pack. The reason it was chosen was because it has an excellent alcohol/volume delivery system - 7.3%. However, I just cracked open a half-litre can (see photo below) and wanted to spit this shit out. It's disgustingly sweet and has little to no carbonation. I'll suffer through a litre then call it quits. Ranking: 1 pint out of 5.

Copyright © 2008 WrappedUpInBooksBlog. All rights reserved.

[flickr video=http://flickr.com/photos/bip/2824772088/]

Like a fashion show

We were in Gretna Green, a village that used to be the first Scottish village on the road between London and Edinburgh, where a lot of runnaway marriages were celebrated in the old days.
Nowadays, it has become a tourist must stop, with coaches full of tourists from all countries and I was amused by all this tourists marching in order to have their photo taken by a friend next to the bagpiper.

The week-end is nearly over again. Mine was pleasantly relaxing. The Scotland-Macedonia match was a bit of a disappointment (Scotland playing pretty pish and losing 0:1) but then I spent the rest of the day chilling at home, watching a bit of Brass Eye, and today stayed in bed watching Spaceballs. Soon-ish my holiday is here (in about 3 weeks' time) and I'll get a chance to reflect on the last few months while out on my own halfway up a mountain (in Italy).

What else is there? At work, I've got a brand plan to hand in on Wednesday, so I'm thinking of working from home on the Tuesday - purely because it's difficult to concentrate on it while you're in the office. It's like having to do a piece of research, only you have emails coming in constantly, and people talking to you or telephones ringing. No good.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Scotland Sunk By Macedonia: World Cup Dreams Over

Prior to Scotland's totally inept performance againts Macedonia yesterday, Terry Butcher was sounding off in The Scotsman.

He said and I quote...

"It is a rigid 3-4-3 system they [Macedonia] play and everyone in the team knows what their job is.  They have players who can just slot into it if they get injuries or want to change personnel.  Goran Pandev is their star player but Katanec quite often brings him off."

My oh my!

What an open and promiscuous relationship those Macedonians have.

It must have given Terry Butcher ideas because most of the Scotland team looked like they'd been 'brought off' pre-match given that they played like a bunch of wankers.

Durham is about two hours south of Edinburgh by train, and is perhaps best known for the magnificent Durham Cathedral.  You can see the cathedral in the pictures below.  Several students and professors from Edinburgh went, and I was able to meet some new contacts as well.  Unfortunately, we got caught up in massive flash-floods in Northern England yesterday, and it took us five hours to cover the two hour trip.  But, the trains had internet connections and I knew several people on the train, so it wasn't as bad as it could have been.  In fact, it was a very enjoyable trip.  Enjoy the pictures below.

Click here for a link to pictures from Durham.