By HILLEL ITALIE
AP National Writer

NEW YORK—–Robert Louis Stevenson is the author of “Treasure Island” and “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,” some of the most thrilling stories in literary history. But in a newly discovered essay, he says he was often bored by the fiction of his day.

“In the trash that I have no doubt you generally read, a vast number of people will probably get shot and stabbed and drowned; and you have only a very slight excitement for your money,” Stevenson wrote.

“But if you want to know what a murder really is – to have a murder brought right home to you – you must read of one in the writings of a great writer. Read `Macbeth,’ for example, or still better, get someone to read it aloud to you; and I think I can promise you what people call a `sensation.'”

Robert Louis Stevenson also published a book entitled Essays in the Art of Writing in 1905 covering the technical aspect of writing. He is also known for A Child’s Garden of Verses. The prolific author also wrote many other non-fiction works such as In the South Seas written during the declining period of his life.

Stevenson’s criticisms appear in a brief, long-lost essay published Friday in The Strand Magazine, a quarterly based in Birmingham, Mich. that has published obscure texts by Mark Twain, Graham Greene and other famous authors.

Apparently part of a larger work, the piece is titled “Books and Reading. No 2. How books have to be written.” The Strand managing editor Andrew Gulli said that essay “No. 1” was auctioned off in 1914, 20 years after the author’s death, and never seen again. No. 2 turned up recently at a location very far from Stevenson’s native Scotland – the library at Syracuse University.

“There are several guesses as to who it was meant for and why it was not published,” Gulli said during a recent interview. “One guess is that it was sent to his stepson Sam or it could have been prepared for a young adult magazine called Young Folks but it was never published in that magazine.”

Source: AZFamily

In you are in Shelbyville, Kentucky on March 21-23, you can the Western Hills High School production of “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” in the school auditorium.

A Robert Louis Stevenson controversy was raised in England in February where multimillionaire Debbie Dove took heat for plans to dig up a garden once owned by Stevenson to install an underground spa for her daughters in London.

Tomorrow’s World

Tomorrow’s World

On the 29th, the Supreme Court will hear a case which could affect booksellers using Internet sites such as E-Bay and Amazon. In question is whether or not selling books printed in foreign countries can be sold through these outlets without the permission of the Copyright owner.

The Appeals Court for the 2nd Circuit in New York decided in John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng, 654 F.3d 210, 99 U.S.P.Q.2d 1641, 2011 ILRC 2481 (2d Cir. 2011) that the first sale doctrine of the Copyright law does not include works made overseas. The first sale doctrine in effect since 1908 allows a person to purchase books for resale without limitations imposed by the Copyright owner.

See more at Northern Arizona Gazette

LULU.COM is running a contest which I have entered. You can see details on their facebook page. I get prizes if enough of my book—A Shroud of Evidence–sells, but they plant a tree with my entry.

Of course you can save trees by purchasing the electronic version of my book.

I win because a tree is planted in honor of my book. So I can breath easier.

Look for my upcoming article in Survivalist Magazine concerning the militia. I am told it will be in Survivalist Magazine #8.

Enter coupon code SWEET305 at checkout and receive 20% off your order. The maximum savings for this offer is $200. Enter coupon code SALTY305 at checkout and receive 25% off your order of $400 or more. The maximum savings for this offer is $400. These offers are valid in US Dollars, Pounds and Euros and cannot be applied to previous orders. You can only use these codes once per account, and unfortunately you can’t use these coupons in combination with other coupon codes. This great offer expires on February 23, 2012 at 11:59 PM PST, so don’t miss out! While very unlikely, we do reserve the right to change or revoke this offer at anytime, and of course we cannot offer this coupon where it is against the law to do so.

Fifth Amendment case in Denver causes concerns

by Glen C. Davis

Recently, the Supreme Court ruled that GPS tracking devises violated the Constitutional Fourth Amendment guarantees because people have a reasonable right to privacy in their cars. As I understand the ruling, however, if you have OnStar® or one of the other government tracking devices already in your car, they can track you through that system.

On January 4th, the Denver Post reported on another example of the courts grappling with the Bill of Rights in the digital age. And the case is shaking up civil liberties groups.

The case involves Ramona Fricosu who was allegedly involved in a fraud scheme along with her husband. One of the items seized by the prosecutors was her laptop computer. The laptop, however, was encrypted and the prosecutor could not retrieve the contents. Fricosu refused to give the password citing her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

John Ingold of the Denver Post reported on the 24th, “In an order issued Monday, U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn said requiring Ramona Fricosu to provide an unencrypted version of her laptop’s hard drive to prosecutors does not violate her rights against self-incrimination. Instead, Blackburn ruled that providing the unlocked laptop wouldn’t be self-incriminatory because it wouldn’t prove anything that the government doesn’t already know.”

Hanni Fakhoury, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, still thinks the Fifth Amendment applies in this case, according to the article. The case is going to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

This is actually a compelling case and one likely to make it to the Supreme Court. On the one hand, you do have a right not to provide incriminating evidence in the Fifth Amendment. That is why signing anything “under penalty of perjury” is quite frankly unconstitutional. You cannot be compelled to sign away your rights.

On the other hand, the Fourth Amendment guarantees, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated,…” While the police today have pretty much the same power that the “Redcoats” had prior to the revolution—which was among the chief complaints of the colonists—they still must obtain a warrant from a judge. In this case, they did that and the seized computer was among the evidence for their case. Whether or not the computer and the location of the computer was specified on the warrant as is REQUIRED by the Fourth Amendment is another topic.

In this case, I would have to agree with District Judge Blackburn. Apparently the laptop was just another piece of evidence in the pieces of evidence that they already had.

Let us set another scenario, however. Let us say that a person is sitting and using a wireless laptop at a coffee shop. A police officer wanders over and the person presses a button and locks the computer. Does the officer have a “probable cause” to order the person to unlock the laptop? No. This would violate both the Fourth and Fifth Amendment. If the officer “sees” something that the person is doing and knows that it is illegal, he may then have probable cause to arrest and cause the person to unlock the computer. He already sees it and knows it is there. If the coffee shop owner, however, sees actual evidence that the person is using the computer for illegal purposes and reports it, then the police have enough for a warrant and to cause the person to unlock.

Granted, in the case of Fricosu, the prosecutors and police have not “seen” the contents so they do not “know” there is anything related to the case on the computer at all. That may be an “out” in this case. Still, I believe there is enough “probable cause” that this does not represent a violation of either the Fourth or Fifth Amendment. Does the lock on your front door, for example, give you a Fifth Amendment right to keep officers from performing their duty after they have complied with the Fourth Amendment?

One question that might come up, however, is what about online storage sites? If a person stores the data at an online site that is not listed on the search warrant, can the police access it or use it as evidence? I would think not until they obtained another warrant for the evidence. Of course, that would be served to the provider of the service, not the defendant.

Just days before Christmas, a new study has emerged that suggests that one of Christianity’s most prized but mysterious relics – the Turin Shroud – is not a medieval forgery but could be the authentic burial robe of Christ.

Looks like a good place to plug my book.

Italian scientists have conducted a series of advanced experiments which, they claim, show that the marks on the shroud – purportedly left by the imprint of Christ’s body – could not possibly have been faked with technology that was available in the medieval period.

The research will be an early Christmas present for shroud believers, but is likely to be greeted with scepticism by those who doubt that the sepia-coloured, 14ft-long cloth dates from Christ’s crucifixion 2,000 years ago.

Sceptics have long claimed that the shroud is a medieval forgery, and radiocarbon testing conducted by laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and Arizona in 1988 appeared to back up the theory, suggesting that it dated from between 1260 and 1390.

But those tests were in turn disputed on the basis that they were skewed by contamination by fibres from cloth that was used to repair the relic when it was damaged by fire in the Middle Ages.

The new study is the latest intriguing piece of a puzzle which has baffled scientists for centuries and spawned an entire industry of research, books and documentaries.

Read more at The Telegraph