SW Cali Laws

Home » Posts tagged 'Consumer Reviews'

Tag Archives: Consumer Reviews

Advertisements

Drone laws in Mexico

There’s few places as fun and interesting to fly your drone than Mexico. Sandy white beaches, picture-perfect blue sea, sunny skies, beautiful jungles and ancient ruins. Oh, and not to forget the hundreds of beautiful colonial towns and monuments that are testimony of the rich history of the country. Mexico is the dream of every drone pilot, yet it is not always easy to get up in the air as regulations tighten and flying drones becomes more difficult.

Flying drones in Mexico

Entering Mexico with a drone

In Mexico, drone pilots encounter two main difficulties, with the first one being surprisingly harder to deal with than the second one. I am talking about even getting the drone into the country. Mexican customs can be tricky, and they can spot a drone owner from a hundred feet. Legally, drones are not within the basket of personal articles a tourist can bring into the country duty-free (like a laptop computer, a camera, a CD player,… – you get it) so it is a welcome target for customs officials who would like to make a bit of extra money.

On my recent visit to the country, I was stopped by customs officials in Guadalajara airport that wanted to confiscate my drone if I don’t pay import taxes and customs fees. No bribing, they did it all officially with a receipt. And there was no escape – I paid about $150 and got an official receipt that would save me from paying again on my next visit. And I was lucky – the customs officer valued my DJI Phantom 4 at about 60% of its market value only. My advice: Bring a small drone like the Mavic Pro so you don’t even get spotted. And make sure you claim the drone is not new and has a low value.

Flying your drone in Mexico

The actual drone regulations in Mexico

But let’s now come to the drone laws themselves. Surprisingly, if you have managed to bring your drone into the country, little will stop you from actually flying it. The drone laws in Mexico are pretty lenient, and they basically only regulate drones above 2 kg take-off weight. If you stay under the 2 kgs, like with the Mavic Pro or a Phantom, you simply need to follow the usual rules of safety like flying only in daylight, staying away from people and government or other sensitive areas as well as remaining within line of sight. Flying close to airports and religious sites and ruins is of course also prohibited.

This way it is relatively easy to enjoy exploring this beautiful country from above. Like any Latin American country, rules are there to be broken – both by you and law enforcement officials. Which means that even if you’re technically ok to fly, a nasty officer could still see it differently, with little to no recourse. So be careful, stay away from trouble, and you will have an amazing time!

 Mexico is the dream of every […]

via Drone laws in Mexico — Phantom Cockpit

Advertisements

Exxon Legal Issues with Establishing Environmental Accountability:

Watts Up With That?

This is in the news today via “Climate NEXUS”, which is a Madison Ave. PR firm:

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced that he is launching a legal probe into Exxon’s climate denial. The inquiry will look into both consumer and investor protection laws, covering the oil giant’s activity dating back to the 1970s. Schneiderman’s investigation could open “a sweeping new legal front in the battle over climate change,” says the New York Times, which broke the story. Two separate reports by InsideClimate News and the Los Angeles Times uncovered that Exxon has known about the dangers of climate change since the 1970s but sowed doubt by funding climate change skeptics to preserve its business. Exxon has been compared extensively to the tobacco industry, which was convicted of racketeering in 2000 for deliberately deceiving the public about the dangers of its products.

It seems all this is part of…

View original post 1,580 more words

32 of lawyers’ most common fears

Does your law practice make you fearful? You are not alone, according to John Lande, an emeritus professor of law at the University of Missouri. Some of lawyers’ most common fears include: Featured imageconflicto-de-intereses4-250x306

• Feeling that their offices or cases are out of control.

• Changing familiar procedures.

• Looking foolish by asking certain questions.

• Candidly expressing their thoughts and feelings.

• Giving clients “bad news.”

• Being intimidated by superiors in their firm.

• Asking for favors from their counterparts in a case or being asked for favors by their counterparts.

• Seeming “too nice.”

• Being blamed.

• Speaking in public.

• Lacking skill and confidence due to limited trial experience.

• Clients giving false testimony.

• Failing to locate “the smoking gun.”

• Harming their clients’ interests.

• Being attacked or outsmarted by counterparts.

• Being judged unfairly by potential or actual jurors.

• Being intimidated by judges.

• Suffering reprisals from judicial disqualification motions or reporting judicial misconduct.

• Suffering “the pain, humiliation and shame of defeat.”

NEGOTIATION NERVES

It’s not just litigation that can induce fear; negotiation does too. According to John Lande’s research, these are some of lawyers’ top fears about negotiation:

• Insecurity about their negotiation skills or preparation.

• Asking questions.

• Being questioned aggressively by their counterparts.

• Looking foolish.

• Silence.

• Appearing weak.

• Being dominated or exploited by their counterparts.

• Disclosing information that may harm their clients’ position.

• Making tactical errors.

• Incorrectly valuing cases.

• Failing to anticipate possible problems.

• Failing to reach an agreement.

• Not getting a good enough result for clients.

Related article:

ABA Journal: “How lawyers can turn fear into an ally”

via abajournal.com

Follow Up Etiquette RE: Biz Issues

Top 10 Items every LLC needs Contact Aiden: (720) 722-0639 and aidenkramerlaw@gmail.com
The Law Office of Aiden H. Kramer, LLC http://aidenkramerlaw.com
photo

Twitter: @_AllUpInYoBiz
http://www.facebook.com/aidenhkramer
http://www.google.com/+aidenkramerlawAUIYB
http://www.pinterest.com/AUIYB
Related: Ryan H. Flax, Esq.
Managing Director, Litigation Consulting & General Counsel

Top 7 Things I’ve Observed as a Litigation Consultant:

I’ve passed another anniversary at A2L Consulting and in my time as a litigation consultant I’ve been both surprised and reassured about the state of the litigation business and its players (I also wrote about my surprises upon beginning my career as a litigation consultant). I’ve seen both the very best and quite bad litigators in action and have consulted for both. Although some litigators don’t live up to my high standards, I’m impressed by many litigators as both professionals and people. Here are seven of my observations over these years that I think might help you in your practice.

  1. Many Lawyers Confuse Chronology With Storytelling

It is almost universally accepted that storytelling is important to engaging an audience (including a jury) and that framing a client’s case as a compelling story is key to doing your best at trial, particularly in opening statements. But more often than not, when I ask a litigation team what their client’s story is, rather than explain “why we’re really here” as they would to a jury and illustrate some conflict and emotionally valuable moral that is critical to juror engagement, they rattle off some chronological series of events that led to a legal injury to their client or some misconstrued relationship by the opposing party. These are not stories and presenting a case framed this way, while possibly interesting to a legal scholar, is not compelling to a juror.

I’m surprised that so many smart litigators fall into the chronology trap and forsake emotional connection to engage jurors. I don’t advise pandering to a jury or excessive emoting by a litigator, but for a jury to care about you and your client and generate the stamina jurors need for a trial, litigators must tap into their emotional brains. This is not done by an information dump, a calendar, or using a lot of words.

A story answers the question posed above – why are we here today, in this courtroom? A story also has all the stuff you learned in grade school: a beginning, middle, climax, and end, characters, setting, theme, and moral.

  1. Some Lawyers Focus Too Much on Too Small Things

It’s easy for litigators (even more so for the associates doing the day-to-day stuff) to over-focus on every detail. The prospect of overlooking a potentially key piece of evidence or being surprised by an unknown fact exposed by opposing counsel is frightening for attorneys (it was for me), so we often wind up thinking way too much about every little thing in a case. This is called being “in the weeds,” and when you’re there it’s exceedingly difficult to escape without help. It happens with the selection of evidence, with witness prep, and even with the development of graphics, where sometimes counsel wants to very carefully think over every aspect, e.g., choosing what font style and color palette and slide aspect ratio will best work for their case.

On each of these things, I urge counsel to take a step back and delegate where possible so they can focus on the BIG PICTURE. The best first-chair litigators do this naturally, and the rest of us need to do it deliberately. Attorney time and brainpower should be spent on figuring out what it will take to win. Let litigation graphics consultants decide what font works best for your opening statement presentation. It will be a relief when you do.

  1. Many Litigators Don’t Know What Tools Are Available

Even though the litigation consulting industry has been around for decades, I still find a lot of lawyers really don’t know what we do (in total) and what persuasive tools are at their immediate disposal. Often, my first conversations with new clients include questions like, “What all do you do?” The concepts of litigation graphics, presentation and persuasion consulting, trial technology, and jury consulting are not concrete ideas in many litigators’ minds, and I often have to educate clients on what we have in our (their) toolbox.

Most often, such attorneys think of litigation graphics as discrete images created for specific points they want to make during trial. They don’t understand that, while that’s a part of our work, such graphics won’t alone provide the immersive visual experience necessary (particularly during opening statements) to persuade jurors.

Also, many litigators seriously consider doing their own graphics and/or in-court technology presentation. They have Microsoft PowerPoint and Word and can cut and paste and they’ve heard that iPad apps make evidence presentation easy. The former is never a good idea and, while the later might be true for some situations, e.g., a hearing or very small trial, it’s not going to work in any bigger trial that could have hundreds or thousands of exhibits. There is a lot to know about crafting persuasive trial visuals and there are professionals who do nothing but build trial databases, edit deposition videos, and run trial presentation software to create a seamless trial for you and your jurors. Litigators should understand this and use professionals (and let your paralegals focus on what they should be doing as well).

  1. Litigators Still Wait Too Long to Bring in a Litigation Consultant

Even though they know better, most of the time litigation teams wait until just weeks before trial to engage a litigation consultant / jury consultant / graphics team / trial tech. Even though they know waiting makes it a more difficult budget-sell to their client, leads to an uncomfortable rush to develop graphics, may make mock jury exercises impossible, and forecloses the possibility of building discovery around what they learn from a consultant, they wait. I urge early planning for trial (at the complaint/answer stage), which is the right time to develop that important two-track litigation strategy, and begin working on your case story and graphics as early as possible. Although we can certainly help you late in the game, we can do a lot more before halftime.

  1. A Lot of Litigation Graphics are Subpar

When I get the chance, I always go to my client’s opening statements and then to as much of the rest of their trials as possible. So I get to see the litigation graphics developed by/for opposing counsel. I’m consistently underwhelmed.  It’s impossible to say whether these poor visuals directly led to the oppositions’ losses at trial, but they didn’t help.

More often than not I see a lot of text-heavy graphics – a severe barrier to juror engagement and communication. I see a severe lack of style, clarity, and intentional design – this screams lack of preparation and deliberateness in presentation. There are key visual presentation concepts that, if understood and followed, lead to persuasive graphics, e.g., font type, color choice, simplicity, complexity, branding, style, and others. There is no shortage of information about these concepts out there, but it seems most folks are not paying attention. We are.

  1. Lawyers Don’t Spend Money Where It Can Help Them

Litigation consulting, jury research, trial graphics, and trial technology cost your client money – very true. But the ROI on these services far outweighs their expense in bigger cases. The cost of a typical larger litigation, such as an employment case, hovers just around $1M. A typical bigger patent case costs about twice that amount. However, the services and tools that could be used to hone your persuasive game at any stage of such litigations turn out to be a very, very small fraction of these costs.

Take a big-time patent and breach of contract case where our client won over $300 million in damages. The costs for A2L’s services were well below $200,000, about 5% or less of the litigation budget and about 0.005% or less of the damages award. I know that our services played an important role in the victory, even though the trial team was beyond outstanding.

But, we still see litigation counsel struggling to decide whether $30,000 or $50,000 is the right spend for a mock jury focus group (a $20K difference that could be the difference between scientific data results and seat of the pants analysis) or whether to spend $12,000 to have a professional trial tech hot seat operator at trial (they should), or whether they can make their own graphics for opening statements in house (they cannot). In my view, saving a penny to lose a dollar makes no sense.

  1. Practice is as Important as Everyone Thinks

Finally, it’s been shown time and time again that practicing oral argument makes sense. The more you practice, the better you’ll do. It takes time, but again, the ROI on this time investment is tremendous. When litigators do several full speed run-throughs for opening statements or oral arguments, I see them do a fantastic job at the real thing. They don’t need notes, they know their subject matter, they are and appear more comfortable, they seem more reasonable, and they use their graphics perfectly in a compelling way.  Not practicing so that you can feel and seem more spontaneous at opening is a recipe for a poor performance. Practice. And start early.

Other articles and resources about litigation consulting and trial preparation from A2L Consulting:

Kraft recalls 2 million pounds of turkey bacon

New York Police Arrest Office Manager Who Allegedly Pretends To Be Dentist And Botched Procedures

1, April 17, 2015 by jonathanturleyDrFeatured Image -- 525

Patients in the Bronx have learned that the dentist who performed their procedures — including botched procedures — was actually not a doctor but an office manager. Valbona Yzeiraj, 45, worked as an office manager at Dr. Jeffrey Schoengold’s office and claimed that she was a trained professional from her native Albania. However, even if true, she is not licensed to practice medicine in the U.S. but performed procedures on patients, including a root canal that left a patient with an infection and another with “persistent pain” two years after the procedure.

We have previously discussed how criminal and tort charges apply in such cases of unauthorized practice of medicine or law (here). In torts, such individuals are subject to the standard of the profession, in this case the standard of what a reasonable dentist would have done in such a procedures. In criminal law, the standard is more straightforward. If you hold yourself out as a doctor or lawyer, you are committing a crime.

Schoengold fired Yzeiraj and she that he learned she was treating patients when he was out of the office. She is now charged with assault in the second and third degrees, unauthorized practice, attempted grand larceny and reckless endangerment.

What will be interesting is whether these patients will sue Schoengold for negligence in the monitoring of his office and employees.

36 Responses

  1. If she is being charged with assault in the third degree, shouldn’t it be assault assault assault?

  2. What the hell is assault assault?

  3. None of the patients complained to the actual dentist of the pain and infections? None of the patients asked the actual dentist for a prescription for antibiotics or pain meds? This should have given him a clue as to what was going on. How many procedures, over how long of a period of time? Also, what’s with the charge of attempted grand larceny? I’m assuming that she was pocketing the money from these procedures, so shouldn’t that just be a charge of grand larceny, not attempted grand larceny? Maybe she was giving the patients time to pay and hadn’t yet received enough payments justifying a grand larceny charge, which might explain the attempted grand larceny. While the authorities are at it, they should throw in an attempted dye job; this one’s a disaster and criminal.🙂

    Never have someone named Valbona perform a root canal. It’s never a good idea. 🙂

  4. This was obviously a case of the office manager in collusion with the patients. Unless, of course, the dentist was in on it. If you go to a dentist and have work done, even if the person working on you is masquerading as a dentist, you need to be registered in the office books. There has to be a record of funds transferred. There has to be some sort of formality. Unless the dentist was in on it, the work was done off the books.

    For the office manager to get away with this, without her boss’s knowledge, the patient was most likely offered a ‘deal’. Caveat Emptor.

    During my career as an Architect I often ran across ‘bottom feeders’. These people wanted to pay ‘next to nothing’ for services and then go on into construction ‘stepping on’ all the contractors. First they got the plans approved and then had them bid. Then they took out a building loan. Then they took the lowest bid-sometimes unreasonably low. Then into the work after the loan had started and interest was ticking along, they got into a disagreement with the general contractor as he tried to make a square peg fit a round hole. The job stopped. The contractor sued. The interest kept ticking along. And everyone got screwed.

    ‘Bottom feeding’ is a crapshoot and all those involved get what they deserve. If one does get away with a Mercedes for the price of a Corolla then good for them. But if not, take your licks and use a real dentist the next time.

    The woman should be charged with fraud but probably not for assault and civil penalties.

  5. Of course the real dentist will be sued. He has insurance! Geez.

  6. isaac

    You make the giant leap that the patients were somehow aware that the person, dressed, presumably, in scrubs, was not a dentist herself. As a patient, I would have no idea that the person, standing over me, was not qualified to perform the procedures. When I go to have my teeth cleaned, for example, I just assume that the dental hygienist, or the person claiming to be that, is actually a dental hygienist and not a waitress from the restaurant down the street. I do not ask to see her diplomas or certificates as she lowers my chair and begins to clean my teeth. Do you? I am going to assume that no reasonable and sane person is going to allow an unqualified and unlicensed individual to perform invasive and dangerous oral surgery. Please, no examples of oddballs knowingly allowing medical work to be performed by unlicensed criminals, since those would be the exception, not the rule. Assuming that these patients had knowledge that she wasn’t, in fact, a dentist is not indicated by the few facts presented here. If the patients were paying, in cash, this woman could have given them a receipt and sent them on their way. Many people do not have dental insurance, so paying out of pocket is not unusual and sidesteps the involvement of any insurance companies. These patients weren’t going to some back alley to have dental work performed; they were going, to what they assumed, was a legitimate dental practice. Blaming the victims here, as you have, is surprising, even coming from you

  7. bam bam – I am one of those who checks out the diplomas on the walls.

  8. going to, what they assumed, was a dental. . .

  9. Paul C

    Since the diplomas have no photos, do you know, with any degree of certainty, to whom they were actually issued? They may be hanging on the walls of the dental office, but I have no idea to whom they belong. It’s not like seeing a diploma and bar license on the wall behind your attorney: you know his name and his identity. I couldn’t tell you the names of the multiple people in these dental offices. Most of us just rely on blind trust that the people in these offices are what they say they are. We do that, I suppose, based upon our trust in the dentist, figuring that he/she would not allow an unqualified person to perform any unauthorized tasks. The same applies to hospital settings. Do you know, with any degree of certainty, that the people marching in and out of your hospital room have the proper credentials? Of course not. You depend upon the hospital and its integrity to hire properly trained employees.

  10. bam bam – you are absolutely correct. I had a friend who had a beautiful ASU Ph.D. diploma on his wall. It was fake. 🙂

  11. Bam bam

    First, read more carefully. The conditions of the dentist’s involvement or negligence brings the dentist into the picture. If the dentist is unaware of the scam and one goes to a dentist’s office and pays in cash, gets no receipt/ie no office record, has the person who greets them do the work, and cannot tell the difference between an office manager and a dentist/doctor, then maybe, just maybe, the patient’s radar was turned off at the invitation to ‘save some money’.

    If the dentist is out of the picture, the office manager had to set up a scenario to keep this stuff under the radar. Perhaps it all went on with the total innocence of the patients, perhaps not. There is not enough info here to ascertain.

    I have never been in a dentist’s office, even a clinic, where I could not tell the difference between the ‘dentist’ and the rest of the people who work there.

    My observation brought in human nature. Regardless of assumptions, good old human nature is often involved. Of course the office manager will take the hit unless the dentist can be proven involved. The insurance company is typically not liable when fraud and/or negligence is involved. That is to say, if it can be proven that you burned down your own house, you probably won’t get any money to rebuild from the insurance company.

  12. isaac

    The first line of your comment was that obviously the patients and this woman were in collusion. Do you recall writing that? Trust me, I have no trouble reading or comprehending. There is no obvious collusion here, given the facts that were presented. I don’t immediately assume that victims of a crime and the perpetrator of the harm are in collusion. My first instinct would be to view them as victims, especially seeing the charges that are leveled against the woman. Again, more facts will surface. Blaming the victims, by stating that they should take their licks and go to a real dentist next time, as you stated (do you remember?) is unfair. These people did go to a real dentist, and this woman, working there, held herself out to be a real dentist. It is also relevant, in my opinion, to note that this occurred in the Bronx. It’s significant because this location would, probably, attract local residents, many of whom are poor and/or immigrants. They may not notice the same red flags that others, who are far more educated or sophisticated, would in this situation. I don’t believe that members of that community would think about asking to see credentials first. Not a slam, just a thought. I could also see them paying in cash as normal behavior, so the transactions would again not trigger a red flag to the patients. You do know that cash receipt books may be purchased from your local office supply, don’t you? Stating that they basically got was coming to them is, as I stated, blaming the victims. For shame.

  13. issac

    By the way, if the dentist, himself, had personal knowledge, he should be charged, as well. He still has liability, in my opinion, even if he didn’t know, since the work was performed in his office. It’s the difference between criminal and civil liability.

  14. Hmmm. Well, at least she deserves an Irish Poem for being nervy!

    Valbona Dentata???
    An Irish Poem by Squeeky Fromm

    To all of the fears in our crania,
    Add the “unlicensed quack from Albania”
    ‘Cause this Dental Plan- – –
    Shades of Marathon Man!
    Is enough to induce a new mania!

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    Note 1: Marathon Man was a movie about oral hygiene and stuff:

    Note 2: The title is a word play on vagina dentata, a well described phobia, with some basis in reality. As wiki notes:

    Vagina dentata (Latin for toothed vagina) describes a folk tale in which a woman’s vagina is said to contain teeth, with the associated implication that sexual intercourse might result in injury, emasculation or castration for the man involved.

    In her controversial best-seller Sexual Personae (1991), Camille Paglia wrote:

    The toothed vagina is no sexist hallucination: every penis is made less in every vagina, just as mankind, male and female, is devoured by mother nature.[13]

    In his book The Wimp Factor, Stephen J. Ducat expresses a similar view, that these myths express the threat sexual intercourse poses for men who, although entering triumphantly, always leave diminished.[14]

    In rare instances, teeth may be found in a vagina. Dermoid cysts are formed from the outer layers of embryonic skin cells. These cells are able to mature into teeth, bones or hair, and these cysts are able to form anywhere the skin is or where the skin folds inwards to become another organ, such as in the ear or the vagina. Dermoid cysts occur most commonly in the ovary. If it ruptures there, the teeth may migrate through the vagina.[1][15][16]

    (PS: I just bet that no other legal blog is having a discussion today about this fascinating topic!)

  15. Squeaky

    You are always so funny and clever!

  16. I have no opinion…I pretty much hate all dentists…except for the oral surgeons who helped put my head back together in an Army Evac hospital long ago.

  17. That is really funny Squeaky. I can’t imagine what kind of psycho would go in and beat on someone’s mouth but an oral sadist? Wat do you think Paul and Pogo? Oral Sadism anyone? 😉

  18. @bam bam and happypappies

    Thank you!!! I am glad you enjoyed it! Here is a really good link I discovered on the topic.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  19. Valbona may not have been as funny, but this is a great scene from the Carol Burnett show.

JONATHAN TURLEY

DrPatients in the Bronx have learned that the dentist who performed their procedures — including botched procedures — was actually not a doctor but an office manager. Valbona Yzeiraj, 45, worked as an office manager at Dr. Jeffrey Schoengold’s office and claimed that she was a trained professional from her native Albania. However, even if true, she is not licensed to practice medicine in the U.S. but performed procedures on patients, including a root canal that left a patient with an infection and another with “persistent pain” two years after the procedure.

View original post 136 more words

http://our-compass.org/2013/10/07/instructions-for-reporting-animal-abusers-and-pedophiles-to-interpol/:

http://www.interpol.int/Forms/Contact_INTERPOL

Wikimedia Commons

Instructions for Reporting Animal Abusers and Pedophiles to INTERPOL: Source Blacklion Knights

INSTRUCTIONS for REPORTING ANIMAL CRUELTY and PEDOPHILES on FACEBOOK: 

Do NOT Report to FaceBook.

  1. Click HERE to Report to INTERPOL
  2. Send INTERPOL the URL (link) to the Picture or Video you want to report.
  3. THEN Click HERE for INTERPOL Report Page.
  4. Put your Email Address in the Appropriate Box, Put “GRAPHIC VIOLENCE ON FACEBOOK” in the Subject Box, and then paste the “URL” going to the Photo or Video you wish to report – with a brief message to INTERPOL (see below for sample).

Sample Statement

I have been witness to blatant animal cruelty (or child abuse) on Facebook at the following link:

These images are extremely disturbing and clearly establish blatant crimes against animals (or children).  After viewing the provided material, you will understand that this is indicative of unlawful acts of animal cruelty (or child abuse) as established by the (Animal Welfare Act) and relevant local and international statutes.  I respectfully request that your resources be applied to remove this material and charge the perpetrators with relevant unlawful crimes. If you witness cruelty on Facebook, abuse to children or animals in videos or pictures, please do not report to Facebook; if you report to Facebook the evidence will be destroyed.

Thank you for your rapid attention to this urgent appeal.

Order a FREE vegan kit: http://www.peta.org/living/vegetarian-living/free-vegetarian-starter-kit.aspx

Take PETA’s Cruelty-Free Shopping Guide along with you next time you head to the store! The handy guide will help you find humane products at a glance. Order a FREE copy HERE

Want to do more than go vegan? Help others to do so! Click on the below for nominal, or no, fees to vegan literature that you can use to convince others that veganism is the only compassionate route to being an animal friend.

Vegan Outreach has a suggested donation:http://www.veganoutreach.org/catalog/index.html

PETA: http://www.petacatalog.com/catalog/Literature-39-1.html

Action for Animals has a very low price : http://store.afa-online.org/home.php?cat=284

Have questions? Click HERE

to abusers everywhere,

you cannot hide,
you cannot run,
your evil deeds
cannot be undone.

consider yourselves reported!

Karen Lyons Kalmenson

http://our-compass.org/2013/10/07/instructions-for-reporting-animal-abusers-and-pedophiles-to-interpol/.