| |
| COLUMNISTS |
|
Business Directory Now Online!!!
Please visit our kind sponsors |
|
||||||
|
COLUMNS: MONTROSE: April 23 marked the 45th anniversary of the founding of the Eagle Drug Store and it has the distinction of being the second oldest drug store in Pennsylvania which has been continuously conducted by the same family. A. B. Burns, the founder, who established the business April 23, 1866, was for seven years secretary of the State Pharmaceutical Board. His son, Geo. C. Burns, has ably conducted the business since his death, and has made many improvements. It continues to hold its own with the progress of the age, and the outlook is most favorable for a continued season of prosperity for 45 years and more to come. [Geo. C. Burns ran the store until his death in 1932. His daughter, Helen, then took over the store until it closed in 1981. Helen died in 1983. She was one of 20 women in a student body of 400 at the Philadelphia Pharmaceutical College, graduating in 1919. Her grandfather, Andrew, drove a pharmaceutical wagon at the battle of Antietam during the Civil War. Her father, George, ran the pharmacy in addition to serving as Montrose Postmaster.] LENOX: While Joe Sinsepaugh was plowing up an old pasture he unearthed twenty-three black snakes. He killed twenty-two out of the number. They measured in length from four to five feet each. HALLSTEAD: On Friday morning about 10 o’clock, Bert Decker, an employee at the chair factory, met with a painful accident while at work on the band saw. While sawing out a piece of lumber a large sliver of wood was accidentally thrust into the fleshy portion of his hand by the action of the machine. One of his fellow workmen went to his assistance and tried to help him get the sliver out, and while so doing Mr. Decker fainted with the pain and before they could catch him he had fallen to the floor and struck his head on the edge of the machine, cutting a deep gash in the back of his head. After recovering from his fainting turn, he went to a physician’s office where he had the injuries attended to. BURNWOOD: Mr. and Mrs. Nelson Foster, of Michigan, are visiting his brothers, A. L. and E. R. Foster. This is the first time the brothers have met in forty-seven years. BRIDGEWATER TWP.: While Mr. and Mrs. Barry Searle and little son, William, were driving near Harrington’s Mill, Tuesday afternoon, they experienced what might have proven a terrible accident and to say the least they had a fortunate escape. They were passing the mill at just 6 o’clock when the whistle blew, frightening the horses. The wagon overturned, throwing the occupants out, at the turn leading to the creamery, and Mr. Searle was dragged as far as T. W. Tinker’s store. As the whistle stopped blowing the team became manageable. Mrs. Searle was the most injured of the family, suffering a broken ankle and Mr. Searle had an ankle sprained, while the little son luckily escaped with only a few bruises. It has been suggested to us that in blowing the whistles it might save some accidents if a slight sound might be given to notify the passers by with young horses to be on their guard. ALSO, Guy Lewis, of Protection, Kansas, is spending some time at Williams’ Pond, visiting family. HARFORD: The cannon on our town green should be remounted and then set with spikes to keep the small boy from using it for a hobby horse. GREAT BEND: J. N. Sackett caught a 4-pound shad in the river last week. This specie of fish has for years been almost extinct so near the headwaters of the Susquehanna. SUSQUEHANNA: Joseph Mulqueen, of Susquehanna, employed in the D & H blacksmith shop in Carbondale, had his leg badly fractured by a heavy piece of machinery falling on it last Friday. He was taken to the Emergency Hospital and amputation of the limb is feared necessary. BROOKLYN: Mrs. Ellen Bailey has returned home after spending the winter with her son, Amos, at Loveland, Colorado. DIMOCK: W. J. Cronk has been appointed postmaster here. ALSO, Frank Benninger, stone cutter at the large Chase stone quarry, has resumed work again. UNIONDALE: Everitt Dimmock, a former resident of this place, died recently in New Mexico. He was a grandson of Eber Dimmock, one of the early settlers of this section. FOREST CITY: S. Leham is giving the town another metropolitan touch by installing a new street corn popper. NEW MILFORD: Charles Wirth is building a blacksmith shop on his newly purchased property on Main Street. LACEYVILLE: Game Warden W. E. Shoemaker, of Laceyville, was a visitor in Montrose Monday. Mr. Shoemaker has done effective work in the years he has been a game warden, and those inclined to infringe on the laws are frequently caught by the watchful game custodian. He has made such a name for himself that the mere mention of his presence in certain localities is sufficient to bring fear to the hearts of evil doers. There is also less disregard of the laws and his firmness in protecting game and fish has won for him considerable respect. Mr. Shoemaker is a former Montrose resident and has many friends here. NEWS BRIEFS: You can’t insult a suffragette more than by telling her that she is no gentleman. ALSO, the maple syrup harvest has been the richest in several years. Hundreds of gallons taken from trees in this vicinity have found ready market at $1.10 a gallon for the “first run” and $1.00 for the “second run.” ALSO, the cold, late spring has greatly retarded farmers with their work. Last year a great many farmers had their oats sowed in March, but at this time, the last of April, very few have sown any oats and very little plowing or other work has been done. ALSO, all over the country they are taking up the matter of not delivering mail on Sundays. It is a sensible idea. There is no use of a Sunday mail delivery, except in very rare instances, as all business of importance can be transacted by telegraph or telephone and the amount of mail delivered on Sundays is never large. Sunday is intended just as much for a day of rest for the tired postal employee as for any other citizen, and they doubtless need the benefits to be derived from attending church services. CORRECTION: In the Hallstead article of April 13, the Herbeck-Demmer Cut Glass factory should have been spelled, Herbeck-Demer.
From the Desk of the D.A. I received a note from a reader the other day that asked a simple question: “How young can a child be to testify in court?” This is a great question - and something that prosecutors and courts struggle with on a daily basis. I wish that I could provide a clear answer for the reader, but the answer really depends more upon the specific child than on any bright line rule. A court must determine whether a child witness is “competent” to testify in a court proceeding. In this context, competency means whether the law will even allow the witness to get on the stand and provide testimony in any proceeding. With respect to a child, there are cases where a child will not be competent to testify based upon immaturity. What does the court look for in assessing the competency of a child witness? First, the child must have the ability to communicate. This means that the child must be able to understand the questions that are being posed as well as being able to articulate intelligent answers. This may seem like a fairly simple requirement, but many children who are able to communicate with family members and friends have a difficult time dealing with the stress, fear and anxiety that arises in a court proceeding. If a child witness takes the stand and freezes, there is no way that the court can find the child competent because the child will not answer questions. Second, the court must also determine that the child has the mental capacity to observe and remember occurrences about which the child is testifying. This particular prong is not nearly as difficult as the first prong. If you have child that can communicate, then the child will also have the requisite functioning capacity to remember things that he or she has observed. While the memory may be imperfect or limited, this does not make the child incompetent to testify - it simply goes to the weight that a jury would apply to the child’s testimony. Third, the court must find that the child understands the difference between telling the truth and telling a lie. While this probably sounds like it is a relatively easy task, you would be surprised at just how tricky this prong can be. How you go about this part of the competency determination depends upon the age of the child. While children generally understand the distinction between truth and falsehood, it is often difficult to get them to give you a definitional distinction. If you ask a child what it means to tell the truth, they will often say it means you are not lying, and if you ask a child what it means to lie, the often say it means not telling the truth. The child knows the difference - but it becomes a circular argument when you need more articulation of the distinction to develop the record adequately. Of course, children live in a different world than adults - emotionally, intellectually, and spiritually. They perceive things markedly different from the adult eye - and they interpret questions according to their perception. It is not uncommon for a child witness to answer a question in a totally unexpected way - and only after you hear the answer do you realize how poorly the questioned was posed for the small witness. When you present a child witness, you must take extra care in how you prepare your questions so that they are crafted to meet the child’s needs and perceptions. Law enforcement officers have to be particularly careful when dealing with children. An otherwise competent child may become incompetent to testify as a result of the manner in which law enforcement questioned the child. If a court were to determine that the questioning was too suggestive, the court could then find the child incompetent to testify. As a result, it is common for defense attorney’s in child abuse cases to seek to have the child’s testimony excluded based upon the “taint” caused by improper and suggestive questioning that unduly influenced the child’s memory and testimony. At these hearings, there is no question that the child is competent to testify; rather, the issue becomes whether the child is parroting things back that did not happen, but the child believes happened because of the questioning process. There is much more to child testimony issues - but this provides some general framework for understandings how a court determines whether a child can provide testimony in a criminal proceeding. It is a difficult process for the child - and for those working with the child in preparation for the trial itself. Please submit any questions, concerns, or comments to Susquehanna County District Attorney’s Office, P.O. Box 218, Montrose, Pennsylvania 18801 or at our website www.SusquehannaCounty-DA.org or discuss this and all articles at http://dadesk.blogspot.com/.
The Healthy Geezer The Healthy Geezer
Library Chitchat No Library Chitchat This Week
Rock Doc No Rock Doc This Week
EARTH TALK No Earth Talk This Week
Barnes-Kasson Corner No Barnes-Kasson Corner This Week
News
|
Living
|
Sports
|
Schools
|
Churches
|
Ads
|
Events
Military | Columns | Ed/Op | Obits | Archive | Subscribe © |
|||||||
