The Reality of Television Essay -- TV Romance Celebities Papers

The Reality of Television Through the years, many of us have watched as celebrity couples have come together and then grown apart before our very eyes. It has become part of the American culture to be informed of what almost every celebrity icon is doing, and who they are with at the moment. Couples that were once said to be invincible proved everybody wrong, and let the pressure of being famous take over their lives. Though some couples do stay together, most tend to fall under the pressure of the media and break up. Couples such as Kate Winslet and Jim Threapleton, Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman, and the famous Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck are good examples of relationships that have failed as a result of the media. Kate Winslet and Jim Threaoleton said that the pressure of fame split their beautiful relationship. Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise who were known to be the hottest and strongest Hollywood couple proves the whole world enough by announcing their divorce after eleven years of marriage and adopting two children. Jennifer Lopez is not an unknown name in Hollywood when it comes to relationships. Known as the queen of jumping around from man to man, she has thus proved herself not to be as strong as she appears. From two previously failed marriages before, she has recently broken off her engagement to Ben Affleck. But the one question that still remains in everybody's heads is; "why do these relationships that start out so strong eventually fail?" One could say that the celebrities aren’t at fault. With the media following a couple’s every move; it would be hard to get a private moment. Another problem that many celebrity couples have is the difference of fame. What? There are celebrities that don’t stay with a ... ...onard Nathanial. (2002). The Greenwood Guide to American Pop Culture. (Vol. 4). Greenwood Press. Potter, James W. (2003). The 11 Myths of Media Violence. Thousands Oaks, California: Sage Publications. Stewart, M. (2000, January 5). Top Reason Why Celebrity Marriages Don't Work. People, Pg 37. McNamara, Joe. (1998, January). Anything goes: Moral bankruptcy of television and Hollywood. USA Today. Pg 69. Picture Sources: http://media.mnginteractive.com/media/paper36/benifer0916.jpg http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2003/SHOWBIZ/TV/02/18/tv.joe.millionaire.ap/story.joe.zora.jpg http://www.americaslibrary.gov/assets/jb/modern/jb_modern_tvkid_1_m.jpg http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2003/SHOWBIZ/books/09/02/lucy.kanfer/story.lucy.vita.jpg http://pictures.risukun.com/2002-01%20to%202002-05%20Spring%20Semester/2002-02-10%20Party%20for%20Yuta/07%20watching%20tv.JPG

An Inconvenient Turth Essay

My reason for picking this topic is, because I would like to know more about global warming. What are the real danger`s that we are facing due to global warming? What can we do to stop the exceeding rapid rates of global warming? I would like to imform other about the new knowledge that I obtain on the subect of globle warming. Al Gore tell how people use to Think about global warming that the world was big enough and we would never have a problem. He also describes global warming as when the sun`s radiation comes in, in the form of light waves passing through earth atmosphere to heat the earth,and then it is re-radiated back into space in the form of infrared radiation, and some of the out going infrared radiation is trapped by the earth atmosphere and warms it. This thin layer of atmosphere is being thicken by all of the global warming pollution that`s being put up there. He speaks of Mr. Roger Revelle as the first person to propose measuring carbon dioxide in the earth`s atmosphere. After the first years of data he intuited what it meant for what was to come. He and a team of other designed the experiment in 1957 with the help of Mr. Charles David Keeling. they started sending these weather balloons up every day. The results of his measurements after only a few years it was startling. He drew the connections between the larger changes in our civilization, and this pattern that was now visible in the atmosphere of the entire plant, and then he projected into then future where this was headed unless we make some adjustments. Mount Kilimanjaro had icecaps 30 years ago. and now it has all melted. Mr. Lonnie Thompson, studies glaciers, and predicts there will be no more snows of Kilimanjaro within the next decade. Its also is happening in Glacier National Park, and all around the world the ice is now gone. He mentions about CO2 and temperature, when there is more carbon dioxide, the temperature gets warmer. He speak of this not so much as a political issue,but a moral issue. It is deeply unethical. He had a lots of faith in the democratic system that these finding would be compelling enough to cause a real change but they were n`t. He speak about when the oceans get warmer that cause stronger storms leading to a lots of big hurricanes and a all time record in the U.S. of tornado, and in Japan record set for typhoons. He contribute the changing of the season to global warming and changing nature plans. He also says that the burning of forests and brush fires causes more co2 to be pit into the air.what all of this means is our ability to a have a future to live in the earth. I really enjoy the movie The movie was very informing I got a better idea about what is happening around the world. I agree with Al Gore something must be done. It was amazing to me about how everything connect together like a domino effect. I picture in my mind how all these great mountains all around us is melting which is changing the temperature of the sea, which cause many of the world`s disaster by storms. Man is destroying himself. It makes me think can we go back where their was not a lots of invention that polluted our air. Can we truly find a solution to this mas, mass, mass, problem are have we went to far of no return. I think about the air we breathe and the water we drink. I remember only about 40 yrs.ago when I was ten years old, my grandmother showed me where I could drink out a spring it was so clean and beautiful and fresh tasting, I hate to think if I when back there to drink what kind of substance would be in that water now. Everything is being effected our food, the animal niches,and season is changing we can`t tell winter from fall or spring from summer and the insects can`t tell neither. If we have gone to far to stop all the problems, why not do, what we can do, to correct what we can, for the future of our life on the earth.

Target Costing

Robin Cooper and Regine Slagmulder Editors’ Note: This article is an updated synthesis of in-depth explorations contained in Target Costing and Value Engineering, by Robin Cooper and Regine Slagmulder (Portland, Oregon: Productivity Press, 1997). Part two of the series discusses product-level target costing; part three, to be featured in an upcoming issue, will address component-level target costing. omers. Consequently, the objective of product-level target costing is to increase the allowable cost of the product to a level that can reasonably be expected to be achievable, given the capabilities of the firm and its suppliers (see Exhibit 1). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY†¢ Product-level target costing works to increase the allowable cost of the product to a level that is both reasonable and achievable given the capabilities of the firm and its suppliers. Step one establishes the target cost by incorporating the capability of the firm and its suppliers into the allowable cost so that an achievable product-level target cost is established. †¢ Step two uses value engineering to identify ways to design the product so that it can be manufactured at its target cost. †¢ Step three applies the disciplining mechanisms to help ensure that the product-level target cost is achieved. The target costing process contains three major sections: market-driven costing, product-level target costing, and component-level target costing.In part two of a three part series, this article discusses how product-level target costing works to increase the allowable cost of the product to a level that is both reasonable and achievable given the capabilities of the firm and its suppliers, in a three step process. Step one establishes the target cost by incorporating the capability of the firm and its suppliers into the allowable cost so that an achievable product-level target cost is established.Step two uses value engineering to identify ways to design the product so that it can b e manufactured at its target cost. Step three applies the disciplining mechanisms to help ensure that the product-level target cost is achieved. PRODUCT-LEVEL TARGET COSTING The objective of product-level target costing is to establish aggressive but achievable product-level target costs. These target costs should place considerable pressure on the firm’s product engineers to find creative ways to reduce the manufacturing costs of the products that they are designing.Target costs differ from allowable costs, because they incorporate the capabilities of the firm and its suppliers into the target costing process. In practice, it is not always possible for the designers to find ways to achieve the allowable cost and still satisfy the firm’s cus1 Product-level target costing can be broken into three steps (see Exhibit 2). In the first step, the product-level target cost is established. This step consists of incorporating the capability of the firm and its suppliers into th e allowable cost so that an achievable product-level target cost is established.The second step consists of using value engineering (and other similar techniques) to identify ways to design the product so that it can be manufactured at its target cost. In the third step, the disciplining mechanisms of target costing are applied to help ensure that the product-level target cost is achieved. The disciplining mecha- Article 32. TARGET COSTING FOR NEW-PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT: PRODUCT-LEVEL TARGET COSTING thereof require that the firm must reduce costs if it is to maintain its desired level of profitability.The degree of cost reduction required to achieve the allowable cost is called the cost-reduction objective and is derived by subtracting the allowable cost from the current product cost: Cost-Reduction Objective = Current Cost–Allowable Cost The current cost is the cost of a new product if it were manufactured today using existing components or variants thereof. No cost-reduction a ctivities are assumed in computing the current cost of the product. For the current cost to be meaningful, the components used in its estimation must be very similar to those that eventually will be used in the new product.If the existing model uses a 1. 8-liter engine and the new model uses a 2. 0-liter one, for example, current cost would be estimated using the cost of the most similar 2. 0-liter engine currently produced by the firm. Because the allowable cost is derived from external conditions without consideration of the firm’s internal design and production capabilities, there is a risk that the allowable cost will not be achievable. In this case, to maintain the discipline of target costing, the firm must identify the achievable and unachievable parts of the cost-reduction objective.Analyzing the ability of the product designers and suppliers to remove costs from the product (see Exhibit 3) derives the achievable or target cost-reduction objective. The process by whic h costs are removed from the product is called value engineering, and it depends heavily on an interactive relationship with the suppliers. The purpose of this relationship is to allow the suppliers to provide early estimates of the selling prices of their products and, when possible, insights into alternative design possibilities that would enable the firm to deliver the desired level of functionality and quality at reduced cost.The unachievable part of the cost-reduction objective (referred to in Exhibit 2) is called the strategic cost-reduction challenge. It identifies the profit shortfall that will occur when the designers are unable to achieve the allowable cost—a signal that the firm falls short of the capabilities demanded by competitive conditions. Typically, in a firm with a well-established target costing system, the strategic cost-reduction challenge will be small or nonexistent, and intense pressure will be brought on the design team to reduce it to zero.For the m ost capable firms, the achievable cost reduction for a product might exceed the cost-reduction objective. Such firms do not face a strategic cost-reduction challenge. They can take advantage of their superior capabilities by reducing the selling price of the product to increase market share, by increasing product functionality while maintaining the targeted selling price, or by keeping both price and functionality at their targeted levels to earn higher profits. To maintain the discipline of target costing, the size of the strategic cost-reduction challenge must be managed carefully.A strategic cost-reduction challenge should reflect the true inability of the firm to match competitor capabilities. To ensure that the strategic cost-reduction challenge meets this requirement, the target cost-reduction objective must be set so that it is 2 nisms include progress monitoring and validation and the application of the cardinal rule of target costing: products whose manufacturing costs are above their target costs should not be launched. The monitoring and validation process helps ensure that the savings identified through value engineering are actually achieved.The application of the cardinal rule ensures that the discipline of target costing is maintained. When designers know that target cost violations lead to serious consequences, they are subjected to a real pressure to achieve the target costs. SETTING THE PRODUCT-LEVEL TARGET COST In highly competitive markets, customers expect each generation of products to have higher value than that of their predecessors. Value can be increased by improving the quality or functionality of the firm’s products or by reducing their selling prices. Any of these improvements or some combinationANNUAL EDITIONS cost-reduction challenge, which creates a powerful pressure on the design team of the next generation of the product to be even more aggressive about cost reduction. In this way, the failure to achieve the allowable c ost this time around is turned into a challenge for the future, not a permanent defeat. Second, allowable cost avoids weakening the cardinal rule, which applies only to target costs, not allowable costs. The process by which the strategic cost-reduction challenge is established must be highly disciplined.Otherwise it becomes a mechanism to reduce the effectiveness of target costing by setting target costs that are too easy to achieve. In most firms, top management approves the strategic cost-reduction challenge before the product-level target cost can be set. Technically, the target cost of a product is the target selling price less the target profit margin plus the strategic cost-reduction challenge. Many firms blur the distinction between the allowable cost and the target cost, however, by stating that the target cost is determined by subtracting the target profit margin from the target selling price.This simplification makes it easier for people to understand the spirit of target costing as being price driven. Obviously, if the strategic cost-reduction challenge is zero, the allowable and target costs are identical. At some firms, even when the allowable cost is considered achievable, it is not referred to as a target cost until the process has reached the stage at which the major component target costs are established. The retention of the term â€Å"allowable costs† shows that top management is not willing to invoke the cardinal rule until it is convinced that the target cost is indeed achievable. chievable only if the entire organization makes a significant effort to reach it. Consistently setting the target cost-reduction objective too high can lead to workforce burnout and, ultimately, the discipline of target costing will be lost. Conversely, if the target cost-reduction objective is consistently set too low, the firm will lose competitiveness, because new products will have excessively high target costs. Again referring to Exhibit 2, the produ ct-level target cost is determined by subtracting the proposed product target costreduction objective from its current cost.That is: Product-Level Target Cost = Current Cost–Target Cost-Reduction Objective The strategic cost-reduction challenge is determined by subtracting the allowable cost from the target cost: Strategic Cost-Reduction Challenge = Target Cost –Allowable Cost The value of differentiating between the allowable cost and the target cost in this manner lies in the discipline that it creates. In most firms, the allowable cost will sometimes be too low to achieve, given the relative capabilities of the firm and its suppliers compared to competitors and their suppliers.Target costing systems derive their strength from the application of the cardinal rule, â€Å"The target cost must never be exceeded. † If a firm continuously sets over-aggressive target costs, violations of the cardinal rule would be common and the discipline of the target costing proc ess would be lost. Even worse, if the allowable cost is known to be unachievable, the design team might give up even trying to achieve it, and effective cost reduction during product design would cease. To avoid this motivation problem, firms frequently set target costs higher than the allowable costs.These target costs are designed to be achievable but only with considerable effort. They allow the cardinal rule to be maintained for almost every product. Consequently, the distinction between allowable and productlevel target costs plays two roles. First, it identifies the strategic 3 ACHIEVING THE PRODUCT-LEVEL TARGET COST Once planners have identified the target cost-reduction objective, the second stage of product-level target costing begins— achieving it (see Exhibit 4). Several engineering techniques can help product designers find ways to reduce the costs of products.They include value engineering, design for manufacture and assembly, and quality function deployment. Val ue engineering, the most important of the three techniques, has the primary objective of maximizing customer value—it tries to increase functionality and quality while at the same time reducing cost. In contrast, DFMA focuses on reducing costs by making products easier to assemble or manufacture, while holding functionality at specified levels. Finally, QFD provides a structured approach to ensure that customer requirements are not compromised during the design process.Target costing and value engineering can be viewed as concurrent activities, as can kaizen costing and VA. The application of value engineering begins with the conceptualization of the product and continues through the design process until the product is released to manufacturing. Even then the process continues, but under the name value analysis (VA). Article 32. TARGET COSTING FOR NEW-PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT: PRODUCT-LEVEL TARGET COSTING The difference between VA and VE is not in the approach taken or the tools u sed but the point at which they occur in the life cycle of the product.VE is used during the product design and development stages, and VA is used for the manufacturing stage and for purchasing parts. For this reason, target costing and value engineering can be viewed as concurrent activities, as can kaizen costing and VA. It would be wrong to view VE as just another cost-reduction program. VE is primarily about product functions and only secondarily about cost. The motivating force behind VE is to ensure that the product achieves its basic function in a way that satisfies the customer at an acceptable cost.Consequently, VE programs are the domain of the product engineer, not the accountant. bility of the existing functions. Second-look VE is applied during the last half of the planning stage and the first half of the development and product preparation stage. The objective of second-look VE, unlike that of zero- and first-look VE, is to improve the value and functionality of existi ng components, not create new ones. Consequently, the scale of changes is much smaller than for zero- and first-look VE. Comparative applications of VE consist of tearing down other products to identify new ways to reduce costs.We define tear down as â€Å"a comparative VE method through visual observation of disassembled equipment, parts, and data arranged in a manner convenient for such observation. † Numerous approaches to tear down exist. The six dominant techniques are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Dynamic. Cost. Material. Static. Process. Matrix tear down. VE Techniques The VE techniques can be broken into three major categories: 1. Direct application of VE principles to the product. 2. Tear down approaches using comparative VE. 3. Miscellaneous VE. VE can be applied directly to proposed products at different stages of the product design process.These different approaches are known as â€Å"looks. † Zero-look VE is the application of VE principles at the concept proposal st age, the earliest stage in the design process. Its objective is to introduce new forms of functionality that did not previously exist. First-look VE focuses on the major elements of the product design and is defined as developing new products from concepts. The objective is to enhance functionality of the product by improving the capa4 The first three methods are designed to reduce a product’s direct manufacturing costs.The next three are intended to reduce the investment required to manufacture the product through increased productivity. There are at least four miscellaneous cost-reduction techniques: 1. 2. 3. 4. The checklist method. The one-day cost-reduction meeting. Mini VE. The VE reliability program. ANNUAL EDITIONS Checklists The checklist method is used to identify a product’s cost factors and to suggest ways to reduce costs. The checklist consists of a number of questions designed to guide the firm’s cost-reduction activities by discovering cost-reduct ion opportunities.Checklists help ensure exploration of all possible avenues for cost reduction. One-day cost-reduction meetings are designed to improve the efficiency of the entire cost-reduction process, including VE and tear down methods. Participants from engineering, production, cost, and sales are expected to come up with ideas for new costreduction possibilities. The meetings are a way to overcome limitations in the approval process used for most cost-reduction proposals. The approval process entails circulating written proposals to all involved parties, who indicate acceptance by signing off on them.Unfortunately, this approach severely reduces the exchange of information and modification of ideas. At the oneday meetings, presentation of the results of various tear-down programs helps initiate discussions. production/sales-preparation stage, and the production/salespreparation stage. DISCIPLINING THE PRODUCT-LEVEL TARGET COSTING PROCESS Disciplining the product-level target costing process begins with monitoring and validating the progress of the design engineers toward reaching the cost-reduction objective.It is at this stage in the process that the cardinal rule of target costing is applied. Only when getting the product to market is so imperative that cost is of secondary consideration should the cardinal rule be violated. Finally, when the product is released for mass production and its actual cost of manufacturing can be measured, steps sometimes have to be taken to reduce those costs to the target level. Once the target cost-reduction objective has been established, the process of designing the product so that it can be manufactured at its target cost can commence.The discipline of target costing requires that the chief engineer and his or her superiors continuously monitor and validate that the progress the design engineers are making toward this objective. This monitoring ensures that corrective actions can be taken as easily as possible and th at the cardinal rule will not be broken. Some firms define an as-if cost at this point in the development process. The as-if cost reflects cost-reduction opportunities identified when the previous generation of the product was being designed or manufactured. In most cases, the as-if cost is above the target cost of the new product but below its current cost.The additional cost that must be achieved is defined as the difference between the target cost and as-if cost. As the design process proceeds and costs are removed from the major functions, the estimated manufacturing cost gradually 5 Mini VE and VE Reliability Mini VE is a simplified approach to second-look VE. It is applied to specific areas of a part or to very small, inexpensive parts. Mini VE is applied during the development and product preparation stages, the development and production-sales preparation stage, and the production-sales preparation stage.A VE reliability program is designed to ensure that the most appropriat e form of VE is applied to each problem. Essentially, it is a â€Å"quality of VE† program. If a completely new product design is required, for example, applying second-look VE is not appropriate. Like mini VE, the program is applied during the development and product-preparation stages, the development and Article 32. TARGET COSTING FOR NEW-PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT: PRODUCT-LEVEL TARGET COSTING falls toward the target cost. Many firms call the updated estimate the drifting cost (see Exhibit 5).Thus, the product design process starts with an as-if cost higher than the target cost and across the design process reduces the expected or drifting cost until it reaches the target cost. At most firms, once the drifting cost equals the target cost, cost-reduction activities cease. There is no reward for achieving greater savings than those required to achieve the target cost. The engineers’ time is better spent on getting the drifting cost of other products to equal their target co sts. estrictive, because the product under review causes additional revenues to be generated beyond those generated by the product itself. Such products include flagship products that create high visibility for the firm, products that introduce the next generation of technology, or products that fill a critical gap in the product line. For such products, the target cost is often relaxed to allow for the â€Å"hidden† revenues. However typically, cost reduction pressures are still applied during the early stages of manufacturing until the target cost is achieved.For the products that feature a variety of options, the final fine-tuning of the target cost is often achieved by specifying the features that the standard product will contain. If the manufacturing cost is too high, for example, one or more â€Å"standard† features might be converted to â€Å"options† that the customer now has to pay an additional amount to obtain. Converting features to options both red uces the cost of manufacturing the standard product, allowing the target cost to be achieved, and increases the selling price of the originally specified product, allowing the target profit to be achieved.Obviously, the reduction in the functionality of the standard variant must be subjected to market analysis to ensure that it is acceptable in the eyes of the customer at the target selling price. An example might include the conversion of side air bags from a standard feature to an optional one. This reduction in functionality will be acceptable only if competitive offerings treat side air bags in the same way. This fine-tuning process gives firms more leeway to achieve target costs set several years earlier. Similarly, the actual selling price is not fixed until just before the product is launched.Delaying these two critical decisions significantly reduces the uncertainty that a firm, in a multiyear product development process, faces with respect to achieving target costs. At most firms, once the drifting cost equals the target cost, cost-reduction activities cease. The process of comparing the drifting cost to the target cost continues throughout the design process. Often when the product is ready to be released to production, for example, planners undertake a final review of the feasibility of the target cost.If the estimated production cost is too high, the design is subjected to additional analysis. Frequently, relatively minor changes in the product’s design are all that is needed to reduce the cost estimate to the target cost level. As long as these changes do not alter the product’s price point, the product’s functionality is reduced and the product is submitted for approval. If the design changes will reduce the price point, the product is typically returned to the research and development group for design.The cardinal rule of target costing plays an important role in maintaining the discipline of target costing. Great care is ta ken to ensure that the sum of the component target costs does not exceed the target cost of the product. Often, an increase in the cost of one component causes the engineers to explore ways to reduce the costs of other components by an equivalent amount. In addition, to help ensure enforcement of the cardinal rule, most firms have a policy against launching unprofitable or sub-profitable products.When the product design phase is over, the product moves to manufacturing. As part of this transition phase, the target cost is compared to the standard cost of production. If the standard cost is higher, usually the firm takes steps to reduce manufacturing costs to the target level. Often, if the standard cost is at or below the target cost, the design of the product is frozen for the rest of its life, and no further actions, other than general kaizen, are taken to reduce the cost of the new product.As with any rule, the cardinal rule occasionally is broken. It is violated when a broader a nalysis indicates that breaking it will be beneficial for the firm. Target costing, by its nature, takes a single-product orientation. Sometimes, this view is too NEXT STEPS One of the key constituents of the product-level target cost is the target costs of all of the outsourced components. These costs are the focus of the next step in the target costing process, component-level target costing.It is in this portion of the target costing process that the discipline of target costing is extended to the supplier base of the firm. Journal of Cost Management board member ROBIN COOPER is a professor in the practice of cost management at Roberto C. Goizueta Business School at Emory University and can be reached at (404) 7276679. REGINE SLAGMULDER is associate professor of accounting and control at INSEAD France. She can be reached at regine. slagmulder @insead. edu. From Journal of Cost Management, July/August 2002, pp. 5-12.  © 2002 by the Journal of Cost Management. 6

Veterans Adminitration Benefits Backlog

Veterans Adminitration Benefits Backlog Backlog for VA Benefits Higher than Once Thought According to a recent report from the Office of the Inspector General, the case backlog to receive benefits through the Veterans Administration (VA) is worse than originally thought. A detailed article on the results of this new investigation is available here.The VA inspector general has identified tens of thousands of cases for benefits that have been either ignored or omitted by department officials. According to their calculations, they â€Å"significantly understated the number of claims awaiting decisions for over 125 days.†Investigators say the backlog as originally reported covers only 79% of relevant cases. They state others have been mistakenly excluded, misclassified, or only marked overdue after processing. VA officials state they are: â€Å"reviewing how best to supplement or adjust reporting on the rating-related backlog.† They plan to have new training and standards in place by the end of the year.The number of cases taking over 125 days to complete rose to 611,000 in March 2013 before settling to 70,000 in September 2015. The number has held between 70,000 and 100,000 each week for the last three years.At the same time, the total number of applications continued to rise. The inspector general cites another 63,600 overdue cases were omitted for unknown reasons- while 10,000 more were recorded incorrectly.Therefore, this backlog is predicted to grow as the number of applicants increases.  It is unfortunate that veterans who have dutifully served our country and sacrificed so much are forced to wait long periods of time to receive the benefits they need. We Can HelpIf you are disabled and unable to work, call Disability Attorneys of Michigan for a free confidential consultation. We’ll let you know if we can help you get a monthly check and help you determine if any money or assets you receive could impact your eligibility for disability benefits.Disability Attorneys of Michigan works hard every day helping the disabled of Mic higan seek the Social Security Disability and Veterans Disability benefits they need. If you are unable to work due to a physical, mental, or cognitive impairment; call Disability Attorneys of Michigan now for a free consultation at 800-949- 2900.Let Michigan’s experienced disability law firm help you get the benefits you deserve.Disability Attorneys of Michigan, Compassionate Excellence. Michigan Veterans Disability Attorneys, Veteran Administration, Veterans Benefits

The Jennifer Hudson Family Murder Case

The Jennifer Hudson Family Murder Case On October 24, 2008, the bodies of Academy Award-winning actress Jennifer Hudsons mother and brother were found in the familys home on Chicagos South Side. Shot to death was Hudsons mother, Darnell Donerson, and her brother, Jason Hudson. Missing from the home was Julian King, the son of Jennifers sister Julia Hudson. Three days later the body of 7-year-old Julian, Hudsons nephew, was found in the back seat of an SUV parked on the West Side. He also had been shot. A .45-caliber gun found near the parked SUV was linked to all of the shooting deaths. The SUV was later confirmed to be that of Hudsons murdered brother, Justin King. A gun was also found in a vacant lot in the same neighborhood as the SUV, police said. The case drew national attention because of the fame of family member Jennifer Hudson, who won the best-supporting-actress Academy Award for her 2007 role in the film Dreamgirls. Hudson first gained fame after she was ousted on season three of the television talent show American Idol. Julias Estranged Husband Questioned William Balfour, the estranged husband of Julia Hudson, was taken into custody the day the first two bodies were found and held for 48 hours. He was then taken into custody by the Illinois Department of Corrections on a suspected parole violation. Balfour married Julia Hudson in 2006 but had been separated at the time of the shootings. He was thrown out of the Hudson home by Julias mother in the winter of 2007, according to reports. He denied any involvement with the Hudson case and denied statements that he had been seen with a gun, but remained in police custody. Balfour served almost seven years in prison after being convicted of attempted murder, vehicular hijacking and possession of a stolen vehicle. He was on parole at the time that the murder took place. Brother-in-Law Arrested Balfour was arrested at Stateville Correctional Center where he was being held on parole violation charges. Prosecutors believed that the shootings at the Hudson family home were the result of an argument Balfour had with Julia about another man. Investigators learned that Balfour tried to get a former girlfriend, Brittany Acoff-Howard, to provide him with a false alibi for the day that the murders occurred.   Im Going to Kill Your Family According to court records, Balfour threatened to kill members of Hudsons family on at least two dozen occasions before the three murders in October 2008. Assistant States Attorney James McKay said the threats began shortly after Balfour and his wife Julia Hudson broke up and he moved out of the family house. McKay said Balfour told Julia, If you ever leave me, Im going to kill you, but Im going to kill your family first. You will be the last to die. Jury Selection After answering questions about their knowledge of singer and actress Jennifer Hudson, 12 jurors and six alternates were chosen for the trial. Potential jurors in the trial were given questionnaires which asked if they were familiar with Hudsons career, if they regularly watched American Idol, and even if they were members of Weight Watchers, a weight-loss program for which Hudson is a celebrity spokesperson.   The jury was composed of 10 women and eight men and was racially diverse. While waiting for opening statements to begin a month later, Judge Charles Burns asked the jurors not to watch the television show American Idol, because Hudson was scheduled to make an appearance on an upcoming episode. The Trial During opening statements, Balfours defense attorney told jurors that police targeted him for the crime because they were under pressure to solve quickly what they knew would become a high-profile case, because of Jennifer Hudsons notoriety. Defense attorney Amy Thompson also told the jury that DNA found on the gun and fingerprints found in the SUV, in which Julians body was found three days later, did not match Balfour. Balfour pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed he was nowhere near the house when the murders occurred. We Didnt Like How He Treated Her None of us wanted her to marry him [Balfour], Jennifer Hudson told the jury, We did not like how he treated her. Jennifer Hudsons sister Julia testified that Balfour was so jealous that he would even become angry when her son Julian kissed his mother. He would tell the 7-year-old, Get off my wife, she testified. Brittany Acoff Howard testified that William Balfour asked her to cover for him  for Oct. 24, 2008, the day Hudsons family members were killed.  Howard told jurors that Balfour helped buy her a prom dress and treated her like a little sister. He told me that if anybody asks you, Ive been out west all day, Acoff Howard said. In response to a specific prosecution witness, she said Balfour had asked her to lie for him. No DNA, But Gunshot Residue Illinois State Police evidence analyst Robert Berk told jurors that gunshot residue was found on the steering wheel of Balfours vehicle and the ceiling of the Suburban. His testimony followed that of another analyst, Pauline Gordon, who said no traces of Balfours DNA were found on the murder weapon, but that did not mean he never handled the gun. Some people shed skin cells faster, Gordon said. Gloves could have been worn. Guilty The jury deliberated 18 hours before finding Balfour guilty on three counts of murder and several other charges in connection with the October 24, 2008, deaths Darnell Donerson; Jason Hudson; and her 7-year-old nephew Julian King. After the verdict, jury members described the process they used during their almost 18 hours of deliberations. First, they voted on whether each witness was credible or not. Then they created a timeline of the crime to compare it with the alibi Balfours attorneys outlined during the trial. When the jury got around to taking its first vote, it was 9 to 3 in favor of conviction. Some of us tried our best to make him innocent, but the facts just werent there, juror Tracie Austin told reporters. Sentencing Before he was sentenced, Balfour was allowed to make a statement. In it, he offered condolences to the Hudson family but maintained his innocence. My deepest prayers go out to Julian King, Balfour said. I loved him. I still love him. Im innocent your honor. Under Illinois law, Balfour faced mandatory life without parole sentences for the multiple murders.  Illinois law does not allow death penalty sentences under any circumstances. You have the heart of an arctic night, Judge Burns told Balfour at his sentencing hearing. Your soul is as barren as dark space. Balfour was sentenced to life without parole. Grateful for Support Grammy and Academy Award-winning Hudson sobbed and leaned on her fiances shoulder as the jury verdict was read. She attended every day of the 11-day trial. In a statement, Jennifer and her sister Julia offered their gratitude: We have felt the love and support from people all over the world and were very grateful, the statement said. We want to extend a prayer from the Hudson family to the Balfour family. We have all suffered a terrible loss in this tragedy. They said they were praying that the Lord will forgive Mr. Balfour of these heinous acts and bring his heart into repentance someday. Balfour Continues to Deny Involvement In February 2016,  Balfour  talked was interviewed by  Chuck Goudie of  WLS-TV, ABC7s sister station in Chicago. This was his first publicized interview since his conviction. During the interview, Balfour stated that his conviction was due to a large conspiracy that included the police, witnesses, and lawyers and that he had nothing to do with the murders. When asked about why  7-year-old  Julian King was murdered, Balfours answer was chilling: Balfour: ...It could have been a wrong place at the wrong time, the person who come in there to kill somebody dont kill who they kill. If you are a witness and you can identify somebody, they can say I killed him because he could have identified me but thats not the case.Goudie: That 7-year-old boy could have identified you.Balfour: That what I said earlier, that he could identify me and thats why he got killed. Or he killed him because he could identify him. Now Julian was smart, he could remember faces. In response to the interview, the Chicago Police Department said: CPD stands firmly behind our investigation which was based exclusively on facts and evidence in this senseless murder. Balfour is currently serving his time in  Stateville Correctional Center  near  Joliet, Illinois.

Earned value management Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Earned value management - Coursework Example Work should be broken down into small elements that are appropriate for planning, scheduling, budgeting, progress measuring, cost accounting, and management control. According to Paul & Young (2006), earned value management is aimed at measuring the progress of an activity against a clear baseline. There are three main values calculated for an activity in earned value management. These include; the planned value (PV), the actual cost (AC) and the earned value (EV). To start with, the planned value is referred to as the budgeted cost of the project’s work scheduled. The portion of the cost approved is used for a given activity within a specified period of time. Suppose there is an activity that entails installing of a new server after purchasing. If for instance, it will take one week according to the plan and cost $30,000 for the hardware, labor hours and the software that is involved. The planned value in this case will therefore be $30,000 for that week. The actual cost (AC) on the other hand is referred to as the actual cost of work performed. According to Ray (2006), actual cost precisely refers to the total costs incurred in completing the entire work on an activity for a given period of time. This cost ought to correspond to the budget for the planned value in terms of equipment, material, labor, and the indirect costs. If an activity of installing electricity in a business building costs $80,000 after its completion then the actual cost is $80,000. The earned value (EV) is referred to as the budget cost of work performed (Gary 2001). This is the value of a project that is actually completed. Let’s say for example, a project has a budget cost of $200, and by a given time it is 40 percent finished. The earned value is therefore $80 but scheduled value at that point is $100. This

E-Shopping Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

E-Shopping - Assignment Example These technical improvements in consumer electronics also found their way into the Internet. An example of this is on-line casino game sites where the player experiences the thrills of enjoying and playing in almost-realistic casino. This realism extends not only to the quality of the audio produced by the act of playing such as table card games but also in the way the cards slide on the table. The cards seem to glide on a real casino table that is equipped with padding and the cards being dealt do not slide awkwardly as in previous computer programs where they seem slippery like being on top of glass. I believe Internet shopping ten years from now will allow prospective customers to feel, smell and see the real product on-line. This may seem impossible or incredible but scientists have found out that smell is nothing but just a variant of electromagnetic waves. Smell is transmitted by infrared waves and scientists are near to finally finding the solution to the mystery of smell (Grigoryev, Myakishev & Yankovsky, 2001). Similar to what the early movies during the beginning of the previous century, the invention of the phonograph made movies more enjoyable due the added element of sound. Now that scientists have deciphered the mechanism of smell, it might be able to produce and send smell on the Internet. Consumers can see, touch and smell a product (such as perfume) before they will buy