Podcasts about mcculloch

This Day in Legal History: “A Friend of the Constitution”On July 15, 1819, Chief Justice John Marshall took the unusual step of anonymously defending one of the most consequential Supreme Court decisions in American history—McCulloch v. Maryland. Writing under the pseudonym A Friend of the Constitution, Marshall authored a series of essays published in the Philadelphia Union and the Alexandria Gazette, responding to public criticism of the Court's expansive interpretation of federal power. The decision, issued earlier that year, had upheld Congress's authority to establish a national bank and struck down Maryland's attempt to tax it, solidifying the doctrine of federal supremacy.Marshall's public defense was significant because it revealed the political sensitivity of the ruling and the extent to which the legitimacy of the Court's reasoning was contested. The McCulloch opinion laid out the principle of implied powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause, asserting that the federal government could take actions not explicitly listed in the Constitution if they furthered constitutionally enumerated powers. The decision also famously stated, “the power to tax involves the power to destroy,” rejecting state efforts to control or burden federal institutions.Critics, particularly from states' rights factions, argued the decision centralized too much power in the federal government and eroded state sovereignty. Marshall's essays, though unsigned, were unmistakably in his judicial voice and aimed to calm anxieties about federal overreach by appealing to reason, constitutional structure, and the logic of a functioning union. His public engagement reflected an early awareness of the need to build public confidence in the judiciary's authority.This episode was rare in that a sitting Chief Justice chose to participate in public constitutional debate beyond the bench. It also underscored the foundational role McCulloch would come to play in defining the American system of federalism. The decision has remained a touchstone in constitutional law for over two centuries, cited in debates over congressional authority ranging from the New Deal to the Affordable Care Act.Marshall's intervention on July 15, 1819, was both defensive and visionary—a recognition that legal rulings do not exist in a vacuum and often require articulation beyond the courtroom to be enduring.The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to proceed with its plan to dramatically reduce the size and scope of the Department of Education. In a brief unsigned order, the Court lifted a lower court's injunction that had temporarily reinstated about 1,400 laid-off employees and blocked the transfer of key department functions to other agencies. The decision marks a major victory for President Trump, who has pushed to return educational control to states and fulfill a campaign promise to minimize federal involvement in schools.Three liberal justices dissented, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor warning that the ruling effectively grants the president power to dismantle congressional mandates by eliminating staff necessary to carry them out. The Biden-appointed district judge who had issued the initial injunction found the layoffs would likely paralyze the department. Critics of the plan, including 21 Democratic attorneys general, school districts, and unions, argue that the move could delay federal aid, weaken civil rights enforcement, and harm disadvantaged students.Trump has stated that vital services like Pell grants and special education funding will continue, though responsibilities would shift to agencies such as the Small Business Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services. Education Secretary Linda McMahon praised the Court's decision, calling it a win for students and families. The legal battle continues in lower courts, but the Supreme Court's decision enables Trump to move forward with an aggressive downsizing strategy that would cut the department's staff by half compared to its size at the start of his presidency.US Supreme Court clears way for Trump to gut Education Department | ReutersGermany's Federal Constitutional Court dismissed a lawsuit brought by two Yemeni nationals seeking to hold the German government accountable for U.S. drone strikes conducted from Ramstein Air Base. The plaintiffs, whose relatives were killed in a 2012 strike, argued that Germany shared responsibility because Ramstein served as a key communications hub for U.S. drone operations. They claimed that Germany failed its duty to protect life by allowing the base to be used in actions that allegedly violated international law.The court ruled that while Germany has a general obligation to protect human rights, especially regarding foreign policy, this duty was not activated in the case. The judges found no clear evidence that the U.S. was applying unlawful criteria in distinguishing between legitimate military targets and civilians in Yemen. They also concluded that the German government had acted within its discretion by relying on the U.S. interpretation of international law.The decision reaffirmed Berlin's broad latitude in conducting foreign and security policy, including alliance cooperation. Germany's foreign and defense ministries welcomed the ruling, stating it validated their legal position. The plaintiffs criticized the outcome as setting a dangerous precedent by shielding states that facilitate U.S. drone operations from accountability when civilians are harmed. The case reignited debate over Germany's role in supporting U.S. military actions from its territory.Germany's top court dismisses complaint against US drone missions | ReutersThe U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit temporarily blocked the Trump administration's attempt to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for thousands of Afghans living in the United States. The court issued an administrative stay through July 21 in response to a request from the advocacy group CASA, which is challenging the Department of Homeland Security's April decision to revoke TPS for Afghans and Cameroonians. CASA argues the move was arbitrary, discriminatory, and would cause irreparable harm to those affected.TPS allows individuals from countries facing conflict or disaster to stay and work legally in the U.S. for renewable periods, typically between six and eighteen months. The lawsuit is part of broader resistance to Trump's long-standing efforts to roll back TPS protections, many of which were halted by courts during his first term. Afghan advocates say ending TPS now would put lives at risk, particularly among those who supported U.S. operations in Afghanistan and women facing repression under the Taliban.The court's stay is not a final ruling but gives time for the legal challenge to proceed. The administration has until July 17 to respond. AfghanEvac, a coalition of veterans and resettlement advocates, supports the legal fight and urges the administration to restore TPS protections. Over 70,000 Afghans were admitted to the U.S. under temporary parole following the 2021 Taliban takeover, many of whom could be deported without continued legal status.US appeals court temporarily upholds protected status for Afghans | ReutersCongress has finally corrected the costly mistake it made with Section 174, restoring immediate expensing for research and development. But I don't view this as a victory—it's a reset. For three years, businesses operating at the forefront of innovation were forced to amortize R&D costs, a move that was not only economically damaging but entirely unnecessary. While lawmakers delayed fixing their own error, peer nations like China and Singapore advanced forward-looking tax regimes that actively incentivize both research and commercialization.Restoring immediate expensing brings us back to where we were before 2017, but stability in the tax code shouldn't be treated as a favor to innovators—it should be the baseline. R&D thrives on long timelines and clear signals, not temporary fixes and partisan reversals. If Congress wants to take innovation seriously, it needs to treat R&D expensing like core infrastructure and embed automatic responsiveness into the tax code. For example, if GDP growth stalls or domestic R&D spending drops below a certain threshold, the deduction should automatically increase—just as China did with 120% expensing for integrated circuits and industrial machinery.Beyond that, we need to rethink what we're rewarding. Under current rules, companies receive tax breaks for spending on research whether or not those ideas ever generate revenue, jobs, or real-world application. I'm not arguing against basic research, but I believe we should offer enhanced incentives for firms that meet defined commercialization benchmarks—like securing patents, licensing products, or manufacturing IP domestically.Repealing amortization was the right move, but the three-year delay already did serious harm to sectors both parties claim to support. Immediate expensing should now be seen as the floor—not the ceiling—of effective R&D policy. We can't afford to let innovation incentives swing with the political winds. That's why I believe Congress should require full economic scoring from the Joint Committee on Taxation or CBO before any future attempt to undo R&D expensing. You can't bind future lawmakers—but you can make them confront the cost of setting another fire.Fixing the R&D Tax Code Blunder Isn't a Victory, It's a Reset This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

DemystifySci presents Paradigm Drift, the show where theorists of all stripes present their ideas about how the world works. In this space it doesn't matter where you came from, where you're going, or what letters are after your name. The only thing that matters is that you've got a deep insight into the universe that you can explain in SIXTY SECONDS. This is our first live edition, recorded at Demysticon 2025 with live music from the Baryonic Acoustic Oscillators. Theorists include C. S. Unnikrishnan, Robin Booth, Ben Wilson, Gareth Samuel (@seethepattern), Chris Lehto (@lehtofiles), Mike McCulloch, Michael Gunning, Howard Landman, Matthew Fox (@memesofdestruction), Taylor Trott, Neal Creamer, and Indranil Banik. Ready? Three, two, one, GO!!!PATREON https://www.patreon.com/c/demystifysciSIGN UP FOR THE NEXT PARADIGM DRIFT AUGUST 4TH, 7PM PDThttps://demystifysci.com/paradigm-drift-show00:00 Go!00:10:35 Quantum Mechanics and Foundational Physics00:25:00 Nature of Light and Electrons00:25:50 Alternative Cosmologies: The Genes Contraction00:36:07 Cosmic Structures and Scales00:43:57 Music, Philosophy, and Science00:47:14 Inertial Mass Explained00:48:06 Inertia and the Cosmos00:50:06 Quantum Waves and Analogies00:53:17 Testing Quantum Predictions in Space00:55:50 Unifying Physics: Ether and Tetrahedrons01:04:26 Quantum Time Dilation01:10:31 Time Dilation and Observers01:12:48 The Hierarchy Problem and Particle Physics01:17:34 A Personal Journey into Physics01:22:12 Science and Post-Scarcity Society01:23:07 Meteorites and Organic Origins01:30:38 Quantum Mechanics and Complexity01:32:34 Atoms and Energy Absorption01:37:14 Hubble Tension and Cosmic Voids01:40:12 Modeling and Systematic Error in Astrophysics01:45:14 The Future of Cosmological Research#theoreticalphysics, #quantummechanics, #cosmology, #astrophysics, #paradigmshift, #spaceexploration, #quantumtheory, #scientificrevolution, #spacetime, #multiverse, #theoreticalphysics, #quantummechanics, #newideas, #openmic, #sciencepodcast, #longformpodcast ABOUS US: Anastasia completed her PhD studying bioelectricity at Columbia University. When not talking to brilliant people or making movies, she spends her time painting, reading, and guiding backcountry excursions. Shilo also did his PhD at Columbia studying the elastic properties of molecular water. When he's not in the film studio, he's exploring sound in music. They are both freelance professors at various universities. PATREON: get episodes early + join our weekly Patron Chat https://bit.ly/3lcAasBMERCH: Rock some DemystifySci gear : https://demystifysci.myspreadshop.com/allAMAZON: Do your shopping through this link: https://amzn.to/3YyoT98DONATE: https://bit.ly/3wkPqaDSUBSTACK: https://substack.com/@UCqV4_7i9h1_V7hY48eZZSLw@demystifysciBLOG: http://DemystifySci.com/blog RSS: https://anchor.fm/s/2be66934/podcast/rssMAILING LIST: https://bit.ly/3v3kz2S SOCIAL: - Discord: https://discord.gg/MJzKT8CQub- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/DemystifySci- Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/DemystifySci/- Twitter: https://twitter.com/DemystifySciMUSIC: -Shilo Delay: https://g.co/kgs/oty671

This Day in Legal History: Second Bank of the United States VetoedOn July 10, 1832, President Andrew Jackson vetoed legislation that would have renewed the charter of the Second Bank of the United States, setting off a fierce political and constitutional conflict known as the “Bank War.” The Bank, originally chartered in 1816, acted as a quasi-governmental financial institution and played a central role in stabilizing the U.S. economy. Jackson, however, saw the Bank as a symbol of entrenched privilege and a threat to democratic values. In his veto message, he argued that the Bank was unconstitutional—even though the Supreme Court had previously upheld its legitimacy in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)—and that it concentrated too much financial power in the hands of a wealthy elite.Jackson framed his opposition as a defense of the common man against corporate monopoly. His veto marked a dramatic assertion of presidential power, expanding the scope of the executive's role in legislative review. By directly challenging a long-standing institution supported by Congress and the courts, Jackson redefined the balance between branches of government. His veto was also politically strategic, rallying populist support ahead of the 1832 presidential election, which he would go on to win decisively.The fallout was immense: Jackson's administration began withdrawing federal funds from the Bank and redistributing them to selected state banks, derogatorily termed “pet banks.” This redistribution triggered economic instability and helped contribute to the Panic of 1837. Despite intense opposition from figures like Henry Clay and Nicholas Biddle, the Bank's president, Jackson remained steadfast, and the Bank's federal charter ultimately expired in 1836.The legal significance of this event lies in its reimagining of the veto as a political, not merely constitutional, tool. Jackson's interpretation of the Constitution, driven by populist ideals rather than judicial precedent, established a precedent for a more active and independent executive.A federal judge in New Hampshire, Joseph Laplante, is set to hear arguments on whether to block President Donald Trump's executive order restricting birthright citizenship, despite a recent Supreme Court decision limiting the use of nationwide injunctions. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is asking the court to grant class-action status to a lawsuit aimed at protecting U.S.-born children whose parents are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. If class status is granted, it could enable a nationwide block on the policy through the class action mechanism—something the Supreme Court ruling left open as an exception to its injunction restrictions.Trump's executive order, issued on his first day back in office in January, would deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. unless at least one parent is a citizen or green card holder. The Supreme Court previously narrowed three injunctions against the order, but did not rule on its constitutionality. Opponents argue the order violates the 14th Amendment and contradicts the precedent set in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), which affirmed that birthright citizenship applies regardless of a parent's immigration status.Judge Laplante had already ruled in February that the policy was likely unconstitutional and issued a limited injunction affecting only certain advocacy groups. The ACLU is now urging him to expand this to a broader class of affected families, citing the risk of statelessness or undocumented status for tens of thousands of children. The Justice Department, meanwhile, claims the plaintiffs are too diverse to form a single legal class and that the suit bypasses proper legal procedures.Judge to weigh blocking Trump on birthright citizenship despite Supreme Court ruling | ReutersThe Trump administration escalated its standoff with Harvard University by threatening its accreditation and subpoenaing records related to international students. Federal officials claimed Harvard may have violated anti-discrimination laws by failing to protect Jewish and Israeli students, citing a Title VI investigation by the Department of Health and Human Services. As a result, the Education and Health Departments formally notified Harvard's accrediting body that the university might not meet its standards. However, the accreditor clarified it operates independently and typically allows schools up to four years to come into compliance.Simultaneously, the Department of Homeland Security announced plans to issue subpoenas targeting potential "criminality and misconduct" among student visa holders at Harvard. These actions follow previous federal efforts to block Harvard from admitting international students and to freeze billions in grants, which the university is currently challenging in court. A judge had already halted Trump's proclamation barring foreign students, though the administration is appealing that ruling.Trump accused Harvard of fostering antisemitism and "woke" ideology, while the university insists the administration's actions are politically motivated retaliation infringing on its First Amendment rights. Nearly 6,800 international students—about 27% of Harvard's student body—could be affected if the administration succeeds in stripping the university of its ability to host them. A separate lawsuit seeking to unfreeze $2.5 billion in grants is set to be heard on July 21.Trump administration threatens Harvard's accreditation, seeks records on foreign students | ReutersThe U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced it will no longer consider a farmer's race or sex when administering many of its key programs, including those related to loans, commodities, and conservation. The decision follows directives from the Trump administration aimed at rolling back diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives across federal agencies. According to the USDA, the shift reflects its belief that past discrimination has been sufficiently addressed and that programs should now focus solely on merit and fairness.The final rule, signed by the USDA's acting General Counsel, states that race- or sex-based criteria will no longer influence program eligibility or funding decisions, though some advantages remain for beginning and military veteran farmers. For decades, the agency had designated certain groups—such as women and farmers of color—as "socially disadvantaged," often creating set-asides or prioritizations for them. This latest move effectively ends that practice.Critics argue the change undermines transparency and accessibility for farmers of color who have historically faced systemic exclusion. Legal scholar Margo Schlanger, formerly involved in USDA civil rights work, said the rule shuts off a vital avenue for ensuring equitable access to federal support. The decision comes despite the fact that only about 4.5% of U.S. farmers identify as nonwhite or multiracial, according to the 2022 Census of Agriculture.US agriculture agency to end consideration of race, sex in many farm programs | ReutersThe Trump administration filed a lawsuit against California, arguing that the state's animal welfare laws concerning egg and poultry farming unlawfully raise egg prices nationwide and violate federal law. The complaint, brought in federal court in Los Angeles, claims that California's regulations conflict with the Egg Products Inspection Act of 1970, which mandates national uniformity in egg safety standards. The federal government asserts that only it has the authority to regulate egg safety and that California's restrictions burden interstate commerce.California laws passed by voter initiatives in 2008 and 2018 prohibit confining hens so tightly that they cannot move freely. These measures were designed to reduce animal cruelty and prevent foodborne illness. However, the federal government argues that while California can regulate farms within its borders, it cannot impose its requirements on out-of-state producers selling eggs in California.This is not the first legal battle over the issue. In 2014, several states sued California on similar grounds and lost at both the district and appellate levels. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld California's 2018 animal welfare measure in a separate challenge from pig farmers in 2023, further solidifying the state's right to set agricultural standards for products sold within its borders.US government sues California over egg prices | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

When writing thrillers, author Amy McCulloch likes to write about what she knows, whether it's climbing one of the world's tallest mountains, exploring Antartica, or the adventure that inspired her latest book, running an ultramarathon across the Sahara Desert. McCulloch recently spoke with KMUW's Beth Golay about the thriller, "Runner 13."

I News report Jarrod McCulloch on Queenstown's plan over freedom camping, interest in a gondola-style public transport network, and dealing with historic landfills.

This conversation provides a comprehensive overview of essential legal principles for law students preparing for the bar exam. It covers key areas such as constitutional law, professional responsibility, and contract law, emphasizing the importance of understanding foundational concepts, managing conflicts of interest, and the role of judicial review. The discussion aims to equip students with the tools needed to navigate the complexities of law school and succeed in their legal careers. This conversation delves into the intricate aspects of contract law and torts, covering essential topics such as offers, acceptance, consideration, contractual capacity, and the nuances of breach of contract. It also explores the foundational elements of tort law, including negligence and intentional torts, providing a comprehensive overview for bar exam preparation.TakeawaysCut through the noise for exam success.Understand how to spot issues under pressure.Federalism defines the limits of government power.McCulloch v. Maryland is foundational for federal power.Gibbons v. Ogden broadens the scope of commerce.Separation of powers prevents any branch from dominating.Judicial review allows courts to strike down unconstitutional laws.Justiciability requires real disputes for federal courts.Conflicts of interest must be managed carefully.Confidentiality is a core duty of legal practice. Offers can be revoked, rejected, or lapse over time.Acceptance can occur through a promise or performance.Consideration is essential for contract enforceability.Contractual capacity is crucial for valid agreements.Genuine assent must be free from mistakes or misconduct.Contracts for illegal purposes are unenforceable.Expectation damages aim to restore the non-breaching party.Torts are civil wrongs that provide remedies outside of contracts.Intent in tort law does not require intent to harm.Contributory negligence can bar recovery completely.law school, bar exam, constitutional law, professional responsibility, contract law, legal ethics, federalism, judicial review, commerce clause, legal principles, contracts, offers, acceptance, consideration, capacity, torts, negligence, remedies, legal principles, bar exam

This conversation provides a comprehensive overview of essential legal principles for law students preparing for the bar exam. It covers key areas such as constitutional law, professional responsibility, and contract law, emphasizing the importance of understanding foundational concepts, managing conflicts of interest, and the role of judicial review. The discussion aims to equip students with the tools needed to navigate the complexities of law school and succeed in their legal careers. This conversation delves into the intricate aspects of contract law and torts, covering essential topics such as offers, acceptance, consideration, contractual capacity, and the nuances of breach of contract. It also explores the foundational elements of tort law, including negligence and intentional torts, providing a comprehensive overview for bar exam preparation.TakeawaysCut through the noise for exam success.Understand how to spot issues under pressure.Federalism defines the limits of government power.McCulloch v. Maryland is foundational for federal power.Gibbons v. Ogden broadens the scope of commerce.Separation of powers prevents any branch from dominating.Judicial review allows courts to strike down unconstitutional laws.Justiciability requires real disputes for federal courts.Conflicts of interest must be managed carefully.Confidentiality is a core duty of legal practice. Offers can be revoked, rejected, or lapse over time.Acceptance can occur through a promise or performance.Consideration is essential for contract enforceability.Contractual capacity is crucial for valid agreements.Genuine assent must be free from mistakes or misconduct.Contracts for illegal purposes are unenforceable.Expectation damages aim to restore the non-breaching party.Torts are civil wrongs that provide remedies outside of contracts.Intent in tort law does not require intent to harm.Contributory negligence can bar recovery completely.law school, bar exam, constitutional law, professional responsibility, contract law, legal ethics, federalism, judicial review, commerce clause, legal principles, contracts, offers, acceptance, consideration, capacity, torts, negligence, remedies, legal principles, bar exam

Today on "Someone You Should Know," Stuart welcomes to the show Debbie McCulloch, a retired pharmacist, widow, podcast host and believer in making the most of our last chapter of life.Visit Debbie's website and check out her podcast at: https://olderandbolder.ca/Join us on the 1st and 3rd Wednesdays on ⁠⁠Facebook, LinkedIn, or YouTube.⁠⁠#SomeoneYouShouldKnow⁠⁠ ⁠⁠#StuartSax⁠⁠ #podcast #olderandbolder #womenover50 #livebold #lifeafter50Each week, Stuart Sax interviews Someone You Should Know. Get to know people who have incredible stories to tell. It's their backstories that make the conversations come to life. From government officials, artists, writers, service providers, creators and dreamers; I share their stories in a casual way. Maybe your story will be the next one we share!Follow Stuart Sax on social media and see more shows at:⁠⁠https://linktr.ee/stuartsax⁠⁠

Lecture One introduces foundational concepts in Constitutional Law, addressing federalism, separation of powers, and core individual rights (Due Process, Equal Protection, and the Commerce Clause). It explains federalism's distribution of authority between federal and state governments, highlighting key Supreme Court cases like McCulloch v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden. It also discusses the essential separation of powers principle, reinforced by landmark decisions such as Marbury v. Madison. Critical individual rights are examined, specifically procedural and substantive due process rights, equal protection standards, and the extensive interpretation of the Commerce Clause through landmark cases.The lecture also covers fundamental professional responsibility topics guided by the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, focusing on conflicts of interest, confidentiality, and attorney-client privilege. It emphasizes the ethical duties and obligations attorneys have toward their clients and the legal system. The lecture concludes with practical preparation strategies for the MBE and introduces structured methods for writing effective MEE essays, including sample questions and essay analyses.Key Takeaways:Constitutional Law:Federalism: Federal government powers are enumerated explicitly; states hold reserved powers under the Tenth Amendment.Separation of Powers: Legislative, executive, and judicial branches have distinct roles to prevent abuses of power.Due Process: Protects individuals from unfair government deprivation of life, liberty, or property.Equal Protection: Requires equal governmental treatment and scrutiny standards to evaluate discrimination.Commerce Clause: Grants broad authority to Congress over activities significantly affecting interstate commerce.Professional Responsibility:ABA Model Rules: Set ethical standards for legal practice; adopted widely by state bar associations.Conflicts of Interest: Attorneys must avoid or mitigate conflicts that impair professional judgment or client interests.Confidentiality: Lawyers have an expansive duty to protect client information, with limited exceptions.Attorney-Client Privilege: Specifically safeguards confidential communications meant to secure legal advice.Exam Preparation:Regularly practice MBE-style questions to build accuracy and analytical skills.Employ the IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) method systematically for MEE essays.Understand ethical dilemmas deeply to clearly articulate duties in professional responsibility essays.These key concepts form the foundation for your continued bar exam preparation.

In this podcast, we dive deep with ex-police diver Luke McCulloch. Luke has written about his time as a diver in his book 'Tales of a Diver'. Follow Luke "Macca" McCulloch and the Western Australian Water Police Dive Squad through a series of dive jobs over a 10-day period. The team travels from Perth to Geraldton, Esperance, and Denmark to assist with search and rescue jobs, locating missing evidence, and even come on contact with a Great White or two.  "Captivating true stories of what our protectors have to endure under extreme pressures, both physically and mentally." "One of the few books to genuinely capture the human side of policing, an emotional ride."  "Takes readers deep into the often overlooked, yet crucial, aspects of search-and-rescue work, illustrating the emotional and physical demands it places on those who are called to do it"  "Sensitive, gripping, and utterly unique, this book takes you deep into a world few will ever experience - the high-stakes, emotionally charged work of the WA Water Police Dive Team" In this podcast, we discuss: ✅ work/life balance ✅ comfort zones ✅ building resilience ✅ men's mental health ✅ PTSD ✅ Leadership ✅ healing ✅ breaking down and breaking through ✅ family and community support ✅ Luke's book ✅ ... and much more Contact Luke on LinkedIn - linkedin.com/in/luke-mccullochau BOUT OUR CHANNEL When you want simple, easy but powerful micro steps - small steps you do each day to transform your Life, Your Career Advancement or your Business Growth and results.. We have 40 years of experience working with over 400 different companies from 47 different industries. Our award-winning coaching, learning and empowerment programmes are not just about online learning - we help you implement and embed smarter systems and solutions into your life, career and business. Most projects start with a speaking engagement at your Leadership or Sales Retreat or conference. Find out more at www.leighfarnell.com or book a 15-minute free exploratory coaching meeting https://calendly.com/lfbb/exploratory-meeting-15mins ✅✅✅ Please like, subscribe, and share! ✅✅✅ Check out our channel here: https://www.youtube.com/@leighfarnell3560?sub_confirmation=1 Don't forget to subscribe! CHECK OUT OUR OTHER VIDEOS https://youtu.be/vYI7YvMud20 https://youtu.be/XhRe890wmRM https://youtu.be/mGz-6sWb4Z8 https://youtu.be/7NVVVKu01WI https://youtu.be/GHsdVAgB9Uw https://youtu.be/A0Ri9uotct8  ======================================================================== ✅FIND US AT https://www.leighfarnell.com/ ✅Talk to our team: https://calendly.com/lfbb/exploratory-meeting-15mins GET IN TOUCH Contact us on: leigh@leighfarnell.com ========================================================================== FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL Get updates or reach out to Get updates on our Social Media Profiles! ✅Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/leighfarnell/ ✅Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/LeighFarnellBB ✅Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/leighfarnell/ ✅Twitter: https://twitter.com/leighfarnell #businessstrategy #businessgrowth #growthstrategy #businessgrowthstrategies #helpforbusinessowners #smallbusinessowners #smallbusiness #salestraining #salestraining #sales #trainingforsales #salesmantraining #bestsalestrainer #bestsalescoachingvideos #bestsalescoaching #bestsalescoach #salescoaching #salescoach #businesscoach #businesscoachperth #salestrainingperth #leighfarnell #salesresults #coach #business #businessresults #businessinnovation #innovation #executivebusinessinnovation

A warm welcome to Purposely SHORT, short as in not long—a weekly episode featuring one of our past guests and their expertise on a certain topic. The aim is to give you a useful insight that you can action, helping you to deliver on your charitable mission.This week, James McCulloch, CEO of Manaaki Tāngata | Victim Support, shares the importance of owning your story in order to live and lead with greater intention and purpose. He reflects on his own journey, including the powerful moment he realised that imperfection doesn't diminish value—a lesson that shaped both his leadership and his personal life.

This lecture outlines the foundational principles of federalism in the United States, explaining the division of power between the federal government and individual states. It defines federalism by contrasting it with unitary and confederate systems, then details how the U.S. Constitution establishes this structure through enumerated powers for the federal government and reserved powers for the states via the Tenth Amendment. The lecture also highlights crucial constitutional clauses like the Necessary and Proper Clause, the Supremacy Clause, and the Commerce Clause, discussing their impact on the balance of power and examining their interpretation through landmark Supreme Court cases such as McCulloch v. Maryland, Gibbons v. Ogden, and United States v. Lopez, showcasing the evolving nature of federal authority.Federalism as a Core Principle: The lecture emphasizes that federalism is not merely a theoretical concept but is "at the very core of the United States constitutional system." It represents a "sophisticated division of powers" between the national government and the individual states, designed to achieve a "balance between national unity and the preservation of state autonomy." This system contrasts with unitary systems (centralized power) and confederations (states retaining dominant sovereignty).Constitutional Basis for Federalism: The document outlines the specific constitutional provisions that establish and delineate federalism:Enumerated Powers (Article One, Section Eight): The Constitution lists specific powers granted to the federal government, such as regulating interstate commerce, coining money, declaring war, and raising armies. These are presented as a "carefully selected set of responsibilities deemed essential for the national government to effectively function."Implied Powers (Necessary and Proper Clause, Article One, Section Eight): This clause grants Congress the power to enact laws "necessary and proper" for carrying out its enumerated powers. It is described as a "vital source of flexibility," allowing the federal government to adapt and effectively exercise its responsibilities.Reserved Powers (Tenth Amendment): This amendment states that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." This reinforces the principle of limited federal power and affirms the states' broad authority over matters not specifically assigned to the national government, including "health, safety, welfare, and morals" (police powers).Supremacy Clause (Article Six, Clause Two): This clause establishes the hierarchy of law, declaring the Constitution, federal laws, and treaties as the "supreme Law of the Land." It ensures that "federal law will prevail" in cases of direct conflict with state law and prevents states from undermining valid federal laws.The Significance of the Commerce Clause: The Commerce Clause (Article One, Section Eight, Clause Three), granting Congress the power "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes," is highlighted as a "most significant and frequently litigated sources of federal authority." Its interpretation has "profoundly influenced the balance of power between the federal government and the states," reflecting "evolving societal needs and philosophical perspectives."Landmark Supreme Court Cases and their Impact: The lecture reviews key cases illustrating the evolution of federalism and the interpretation of federal power:Federalism, Division of Powers, Constitutional Law, Supreme Court, State Sovereignty, Commerce Clause, Judicial Review, Implied Powers, Sovereign Immunity, Civil Rights

This lecture explores the concept of federalism and the division of powers between the federal government and the states, highlighting constitutional provisions, landmark Supreme Court cases, and ongoing debates surrounding the balance of power. It emphasizes the practical applications of federalism in areas such as civil rights and environmental regulation, while also addressing criticisms and proposals for reform.TakeawaysFederalism is a system where power is divided between national and state governments.The Constitution enumerates specific powers for the federal government.The Necessary and Proper Clause allows for implied powers.The Supremacy Clause establishes federal law as the highest authority.The Commerce Clause has been interpreted in various ways by the Supreme Court.Landmark cases like McCulloch v. Maryland shaped federalism.Debates continue over the balance of power between state and national governments.Sovereign immunity limits individuals' ability to sue states.Federalism can promote local solutions but may also entrench inequality.Reform proposals include re-examining sovereign immunity and federal power limits.Federalism, Division of Powers, Constitutional Law, Supreme Court, State Sovereignty, Commerce Clause, Judicial Review, Implied Powers, Sovereign Immunity, Civil Rights

Welcoming James McCulloch, CEO of Victim Support / Manaaki Tāngata, to PurposelyIn this episode, James shares the work of Victim Support /Manaaki Tāngata—a national organisation dedicated to ensuring no one in Aotearoa must face the impact of crime or traumatic events alone. The organisation provides practical help, information, emotional support, funding,and referrals to other services, helping people during some of the most difficult moments in their lives.James took on the role of CEO during a turbulent period. Theorganisation was under public scrutiny, including negative media coverage highlighting internal challenges such as staff dissatisfaction and strained relationships with key stakeholders. Since then, he has worked to rebuildtrust—both inside and outside the organisation—by improving working conditions, addressing long-standing issues, strengthening frontline services and growingfunding.  A focus on listening to staff and restoring confidence has helped Victim Support become more stable and effective.Born in Melbourne Australia but raised in North Wales, UK,James began his career in horticulture and landscape architecture. He later held senior management roles in local government, including with the City of London Corporation, where he was responsible for managing major public spacesand historic assets. This experience helped develop his skills in operational leadership, community engagement, and public service delivery.After moving to New Zealand with his family, James worked in the non-profit and education sectors, including with English Language Partners and Inspire Group. He joined Victim Support with a clear focus: prioritise theneeds of victims and build an organisation where staff are supported and equipped to deliver.He has introduced changes to reduce caseloads, improve staff wellbeing, and to begin building stronger connections with Māori, rainbow communities, and other under-served groups. He's also focused on using technology to improve services and growing partnerships to extend VictimSupport's reach.Looking ahead, Victim Support / Manaaki Tāngata aims toensure that every victim of crime in Aotearoa receives an offer of support.Scaling operations sustainably—while keeping staff wellbeing at the forefront—is a key challenge, alongside reducing reliance on government fundingto strengthen long-term resilience.James's approach to leadership is shaped by a career spentin growth-focused leadership roles across New Zealand, Australia, and Asia. From managing parks and heritage sites in central London to leading a frontline support service, he brings a steady, pragmatic focus to helping communities through complex and often difficult circumstances.

Author Holly McCulloch took time out of her day to stop by the podcast to chat with Leah about her release The Ick and all things authory. 

Jared discusses the latest events in Queenstown including an update on tourism.

Steve Courtney, Jordan Young and Brian Cairns talk with Ashton McCulloch – Michigan State University golfer and Rocket Classic Sponsor Exemption.

In this inspiring and wisdom-packed episode of Brad & Abbey Live, hosts Brad Zerbo and Abbey Blue Eyes welcome special guest Lt. Colonel Oak McCulloch, veteran, author, and leadership coach, for an unforgettable conversation about what it really means to lead with courage, humility, and service. Drawing from over 40 years of experience in the military, disaster relief, and civic leadership, Oak shares powerful stories and principles from his book Your Leadership Legacy that apply to every level of life, from the battlefield to the boardroom to the kitchen table. The discussion covers everything from the importance of reflection and accountability to the dangers of micromanagement and ego-driven leadership. Oak emphasizes that great leaders teach, train, and trust their people, and they do it with consistency, integrity, and compassion. Whether recounting tense moments in Kosovo or managing a Gulf Coast food bank after the BP oil spill, Oak delivers hard-won truths with warmth, humor, and straight-shooting candor. Together, Brad, Abbey, and Oak explore generational challenges, the destruction of the nuclear family, the emotional toll of leadership, and why true influence begins at home. From “lead by walking around” to the idea of the “holy moment,” this episode offers not just leadership advice, but life advice, reminding us all that leadership isn't about titles, it's about impact. Whether you're a CEO, a foreman, a parent, or a stay-at-home mom, this episode will leave you with practical tools and timeless insight to lead well and live with purpose.

A man described as a “budding serial killer” was placed in a state-approved mental health residential care home in Columbia, South Carolina, where he allegedly killed and cannibalized two individuals over a five-month period. The accused consumed the ears of both victims and drank one victim's blood. Jared Ondrea was the first victim. Attorneys Joe McCulloch, and Dick Harpootlian filed lawsuits on behalf of Peggy Ondrea, the grandmother of Jared. In this interview, McCulloch and Harpootlian lay out why this tragedy should never have happened and who all was responsible. This is part one of an interview with McCulloch and Harpootlian. In episode two, Harpootlian discusses his new book about South Carolina serial killer, Pee Wee Gaskins and talks about the chance of Alex Murdaugh getting a new trail for the murders of his wife and son. Seton Tucker and Matt Harris began the Impact of Influence podcast shortly after the murders of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh. Now they cover true crime past and present from the southeast region of the U.S. Impact of Influence is part of the Evergreen Podcast Company. Look for Impact of Influence on Facebook and Youtube. Please support our sponsors Elevate your closet with Quince. Go to Quince dot com slash impact for free shipping on your order and three hundred and sixty-five -day returns. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A judge's sentence of five month's probation in the high-profile case of a former cop who opened fire at a Halloween trunk-or-treat is an example of the challenges judges face every day. “Doing sentencing is the most difficult thing I think that trial judges do,” says former Judge Nannette Baker, who discussed the case on this month's Legal Roundtable. Along with the controversial sentencing, Baker and attorneys Bill Freivogel and Sarah Swatosh analyze the latest updates on KDHX's bankruptcy and revelations about interim U.S. Attorney Ed Martin.

Today we're proud to release the first episode of our brand new podcast "Thought Leaders". In this episode, Samantha McLean goes in depth with Andrew McCulloch, former CEO of Ray White NSW/ACT turned business owner of Ray White Shore Group. Andrew McCulloch is a master of real estate transformation. He's spent his career understanding what makes high-performing agencies tick—first as a top salesperson, then as a corporate leader who helped double New South Wales's market share. Now, as the owner of Ray White Shore Group on the Gold Coast, Andrew is applying every lesson he's learned about recruitment, leadership, and technology to build his dream agency from the ground up. In this episode, Samantha McLean talks to Andrew about what he learned from examining hundreds of real estate businesses over decades. They discuss why the most valuable approach to leadership is about relationships, not recruitment; how studying Sydney's top performers like Josh Tesolin and Gavin Rubinstein show the power of high performing cultures; Andrew's belief that commission splits matter far less than providing value and support; and why he's betting on AI to transform everything from admin tasks to customer relationships. You can check out their full conversation here: If you want a quick summary, here are some of the themes they touch on: Leadership is everything—pick the right leader, not just the right brand Andrew spent years recruiting top performers like Vivian Yap and Josh Tesolin to Ray White. His secret? He never tried to recruit them at all. Instead, he built genuine relationships. "Don't focus on them joining the business, focus on building a good relationship with them," he explains. He'd go to family dinners with Vivian, meet her in Bali on holiday, and simply care about the person first. This philosophy extends to his advice for agents: "The number one thing that you should be considering is pick the right leader...because that's so important in your success or failure." Don't underestimate the power of competitive culture to break performance ceilings When Ray White introduced leaderboards through their Pulse app, Andrew watched something extraordinary happen. Top performers like Josh Tesolin, Vivian Yap, and Gavin Rubinstein began pushing each other to new heights—from writing $3 million to eventually $10 million in commissions. "I don't believe that any one of them would be writing those levels if it wasn't for the other," Andrew observes. He calls this the end of self-limiting beliefs: "Until people have seen that it can be done, they can't do it." Value trumps cost every time—whether it's franchise fees or commission splits Having worked under different models throughout his career, Andrew learned a painful lesson early on. At 20, he left Ray White's 60% split for an independent offering 90% with no franchise fee—and made less money than ever before. "I didn't have all of the bells and whistles and all the stuff that I thought I didn't need," he recalls. His advice? "Stop looking at costs. The cost is irrelevant. Look at value." He now pays substantial franchise fees but gets his money's worth, knowing that support systems enable agents to focus on what matters: building relationships and making sales. Customer service doesn't end at settlement—and that's where the opportunity lies Seventy percent of property sellers don't return to their original agent—a statistic that horrifies Andrew. Taking inspiration from the car industry's after-sales service, he's created a dedicated role at Shore Group focused purely on post-settlement care. "The automotive industry does this so much better than us," he notes, describing how dealerships maintain relationships long after the sale. His customer service team handles everything from anniversary letters to market updates, an investment he believes was costing his business $2-3 million annually in lost repeat...

Oil tycoon Robert P. McCulloch purchased London Bridge for $2,460,000 on 17th April, 1968. The Victorian structure, which had been sinking into the River Thames at a rate of one inch every eight years, was then dismantled stone by stone and shipped to the USA, where it now bestrides Lake Havasu City, Arizona.  The wheeze was the work of advertising executive-turned-London councilor Ivan Luckin, who convinced his colleagues that it might be possible to sell the bridge to pay for the costs of building a new one, and set about a marketing blitz including a press conference in New York in which he invoked the crossing's illustrious Roman history. In this episode, Arion, Rebecca and Olly revisit the gaudy launch ceremony; debunk the myth that McCulloch thought he was buying Tower Bridge instead; and reveal that buying the bridge wasn't even this eccentric entrepreneur's wackiest idea… Further Reading: • ‘How London Bridge Ended Up In Arizona' (HISTORY, 2016): https://www.history.com/news/how-london-bridge-ended-up-in-arizona • Inside Arizona's London Bridge (BBC, 2018): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnHy4_P8SCE • ‘London Bridge in America - The Tall Story of a Transatlantic Crossing, By Travis Elborough' (Jonathan Cape, 2013):  https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/London_Bridge_in_America/n96uDvKN3ioC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Ivan+Luckin&pg=PA271&printsec=frontcover Love the show? Support us!  Join 

Jared discusses the Shotover wastewater treatment plant, NASA is back in Wanaka, an update on the Roxburgh Cinema and Town Hall, and there's been snow... in April! Jared McCulloch is a 1 News Reporter in Queenstown

Embracing Change and Aging Boldly After facing profound loss, including the death of her husband, Debbie McCulloch found herself asking, "Who am I now?"—a question that led her to embrace new beginnings and launch her podcast, Older & Bolder. In this episode, Debbie shares her journey of resilience, reinvention, and the belief that aging is a privilege to be embraced. If you've ever felt stuck or unsure about your next chapter, this conversation will remind you that it's never too late to live boldly.  

Kaarle McCulloch is a former Olympic Track Sprint Cyclist with a 15-year career at the top of her sport including Olympic Bronze and 4 World Championships. Retired in 2021, Kaarle went on to coach the British Women's Sprint Team from 2022-2023 with great success and recently returned to Australia in late 2023 to fulfil the same role as Australian Women's Sprint coach and QAS coach. Kaarle has a degree in Health and Physical Education and is a former level 1 ASCA coach. David Watts has been preparing athletes for competitive success for well over 10 years. Beginning his career at the QAS between 2011-2016, David has since spent time at the Geelong Football Club as a rehabilitation coach and also at the Melbourne Demons as the head of strength and power. More recently he has returned to the QAS and is currently working with track and field, cycling and beach volleyball athletes. David is accredited with the ASCA as a Master L3 Coach and this will be his fourth time presenting at the ASCA international conference QUOTES “I am from a family of teachers and I believe really strongly that coaching is teaching and teaching is coaching. So a lot of my coaching philosophy centres around pedagogical practices and trying to create learning environments for athletes” “For track cycling, I feel very strongly that its foundation is in strength. So gym forms the first and probably the most important part of becoming fast and I work off a sort of a triangle model where strength is at the bottom. To be powerful, you need to be strong. And then to be fast, you need to be powerful.” “I don't like to call it taper because I think taper has some connotations around it and athletes think that they're going to feel good and that everything's going to go amazing but it never ever happens that way. And so, unload for me is all in its title. It's about taking out work as we get closer to the event.” “I'd say 90 % of time the gym and bike loading is aligned. So if we've got a de-load week or a low week, it's low in the gym as well.” “So in the team sprint cycling, we've got three types of acceleration, we've got low range, so from zero, we've got mid-range which is our high power and we've got, you know, high range acceleration, which is our speed. So that's how the week looks. Work high torque, high strength in the start of the week. We work high power midweek, and then we work that sort of back end speed at the end of the week. And that doesn't really shift through all of the periodized phases. What shifts is the specificity of it.” “We have a monthly catch up with my group and every month they have to present something back on what they've learned through the month and that gives them accountability and ownership over what they're doing.” SHOWNOTES 1) Kaarle and David's backgrounds as athletes and coaches 2) What type of collaboration is needed when developing athletes and Kaarle's philosophy on sprint cycling performance 3) Benchmarking events in sprint cycling and periodization approaches from the macro- to the micro-cycle 4) What base building, general prep, specific prep and unload phases can look like for athletes in sprint cycling 5) Different weekly structures and adapting the structure around different athletes and their experience and fiber typology 6) Physical benchmarks for athletes in sprint cycling and 220kg full squats 7) Pedagogical approaches to developing athletes and session planning considerations and creating conditions for athletes to both fail and play 8) One legged box jumps and the power of vulnerability PEOPLE MENTIONED Anna Meares Matthew Denny Brene Brown

Checkpoint invited a veritable buffet of people on the programme to talk about the school lunch supplier that's in financial strife; Libelle went into liquidation today. RNZ deputy political editor Craig McCulloch spoke to Lisa Owen. 

Queenstown, Central Otago and Otago Regional councils sign off on a combined submission under the government's Regional Deal agreement, what's next for the the 128 year-old Roxburgh cinema after the devastating fire, and another A-list celebrity is in Queenstown. Jared McCulloch is a 1 News Reporter in Queenstown,

Send us a textOak McCulloch returns to the podcast for another discussion on servant leadership and its lasting impact. His ability to drive change continues to inspire, and his book Your Leadership Legacy: Becoming the Leader You Were Meant to Be remains a valuable resource.In this episode, we catch up on Oak's journey, the impact of his leadership principles today, and what's changed since our last conversation. Whether you're leading a team or seeking growth, this episode is full of wisdom from Oak's 40+ years of experience.About Our Guest:Retired Lieutenant Colonel Oakland McCulloch is an internationally recognized speaker and author of Your Leadership Legacy: Becoming the Leader You Were Meant to Be. With 40 years of leadership experience, including 23 in the U.S. Army, Oak's servant leadership philosophy inspires professionals to lead with integrity and purpose.Key Topics:Oak's latest projects and updates since our last conversationThe power of servant leadership todayLessons from Your Leadership Legacy for 2025Overcoming leadership challenges in today's worldPractical advice for becoming the leader you were meant to beResources:Connect with Oak: https://www.ltcoakmcculloch.com/Your Leadership Legacy: https://a.co/d/fj9xnXUPrevious episode: https://www.youtube.com/live/O3-l-gTJTfwIf you enjoy this episode, please leave a review and share it with someone who would benefit from Oak's insights!Visit my website: https://thehello.llc/THERESACARPENTERRead my writings on my blog: https://www.theresatapestries.com/Listen to other episodes on my podcast: https://storiesofservice.buzzsprout.comWatch episodes of my podcast:https://www.youtube.com/c/TheresaCarpenter76

This Day in Legal History: United States v. Peters DecidedOn February 20, 1809, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in United States v. Peters, a case that reinforced the authority of federal courts over state legislatures. The dispute arose when the Pennsylvania legislature attempted to defy a federal court order regarding a financial judgment. Chief Justice John Marshall, writing for the Court, held that allowing states to override federal judicial decisions would threaten the constitutional structure and weaken the judiciary's role as an independent branch of government. The ruling reaffirmed the supremacy of federal law, a principle later cemented by cases like McCulloch v. Maryland and Cooper v. Aaron.The case stemmed from a long-running legal battle over a prize ship seized during the Revolutionary War. A Pennsylvania state court had refused to comply with a federal ruling ordering restitution to the ship's rightful owners. In his opinion, Marshall emphasized that state governments could not interfere with federal judicial authority, warning that such actions would lead to anarchy. Pennsylvania resisted the decision, but the ruling set a lasting precedent that federal courts have the final say on legal disputes involving national law.This decision played a crucial role in shaping American federalism by ensuring that states could not undermine federal judicial power. It reinforced the constitutional principle that the judiciary must remain independent to uphold the rule of law. In doing so, United States v. Peters helped establish the judiciary as a coequal branch of government, capable of enforcing its decisions even in the face of state opposition.President Donald Trump has announced plans to nominate several former advisers from his first term to key Justice Department positions. John Eisenberg has been tapped to lead the national security division, while Brett Shumate will head the civil division. Shumate, currently acting in that role, has been involved in defending the administration against lawsuits related to federal worker dismissals and agency restructuring. He previously worked at the law firm Jones Day and defended Trump's unsuccessful attempt to limit birthright citizenship.  Eisenberg, who served as legal adviser to the National Security Council during Trump's first term, has held multiple senior roles in the Justice Department and clerked for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Patrick Davis is set to lead the Office of Legislative Affairs, marking his third time in the department. All three appointments require Senate confirmation.  The nominations follow Trump's directive to remove all U.S. attorneys appointed by former President Joe Biden, claiming the Justice Department had been politicized. This move underscores Trump's continued efforts to reshape the department with loyalists from his previous administration.Trump picks first-term loyalists for top Justice Department posts | ReutersMastercard's £200 million settlement of a long-running lawsuit over card fees is facing opposition, raising concerns about the future of UK class action funding. The lawsuit, originally valued at £10 billion, was brought on behalf of 44 million British consumers, meaning each claimant would receive only about £2.27 if all sought payment. The deal is being challenged by litigation funder Innsworth Capital, which stands to receive half the settlement, arguing that the terms are unfair given its £45 million investment in the case.  The Competition Appeal Tribunal in London must now decide on the first contested settlement in the UK's emerging class action framework. The case comes amid growing uncertainty in the sector following a 2023 Supreme Court ruling that invalidated many litigation funding agreements. Further legal tests are expected, as the Court of Appeal is set to review funding arrangements for lawsuits against Apple and Sony later this year.  Consumer advocate Walter Merricks, who led the case, and Mastercard defend the settlement, stating that economic assessments now value the claim at under £200 million due to prior legal setbacks. The tribunal's decision could significantly impact future litigation funding in the UK.Mastercard landmark deal challenged in test for UK class action funding | ReutersA U.S. judge is scrutinizing a Justice Department request to drop corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, raising concerns about political interference. The request, ordered by a Trump-appointed official, has led to multiple resignations within the Justice Department, with critics arguing it ties Adams' legal fate to his cooperation with Trump's immigration policies. Adams, facing reelection, has denied any wrongdoing, while some Democrats fear dismissing the case would make him indebted to the Trump administration. The Justice Department's request to drop the charges "without prejudice" leaves the possibility of future prosecution, a move former federal prosecutors warn could be used as leverage.  The judge overseeing the case, Dale Ho, is a former civil rights attorney and Biden appointee whose nomination faced Republican opposition. Ho has a background in voting rights advocacy and previously challenged Trump administration policies before the Supreme Court. His handling of the Adams case will be the most high-profile decision of his judicial career. Legal experts note that while Ho cannot force prosecutors to continue the case, he can question their motives, particularly the timing of a potential re-filing after the New York mayoral election.  This case underscores broader concerns about the Justice Department's independence under Trump, with critics accusing his administration of using federal prosecutions to reward allies and punish opponents. Adams has previously claimed, without evidence, that the charges were political retribution from the Biden administration. Meanwhile, New York's political establishment is divided, with some calling for Adams' resignation and others waiting to see how the case unfolds. Governor Kathy Hochul has reportedly met with political leaders to discuss Adams' future, further intensifying the controversy.US judge questions 'unusual' request to drop Eric Adams case | ReutersWho is Dale Ho, the judge deciding whether to drop Eric Adams' case? | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Support the show to get full episodes, full archive, and join the Discord community. The Transmitter is an online publication that aims to deliver useful information, insights and tools to build bridges across neuroscience and advance research. Visit thetransmitter.org to explore the latest neuroscience news and perspectives, written by journalists and scientists. Read more about our partnership. Sign up for the “Brain Inspired” email alerts to be notified every time a new “Brain Inspired” episode is released: To explore more neuroscience news and perspectives, visit thetransmitter.org. Since the 1940s and 50s, back at the origins of what we now think of as artificial intelligence, there have been lots of ways of conceiving what it is that brains do, or what the function of the brain is. One of those conceptions, going to back to cybernetics, is that the brain is a controller that operates under the principles of feedback control. This view has been carried down in various forms to us in present day. Also since that same time period, when McCulloch and Pitts suggested that single neurons are logical devices, there have been lots of ways of conceiving what it is that single neurons do. Are they logical operators, do they each represent something special, are they trying to maximize efficiency, for example? Dmitri Chklovskii, who goes by Mitya, runs the Neural Circuits and Algorithms lab at the Flatiron Institute. Mitya believes that single neurons themselves are each individual controllers. They're smart agents, each trying to predict their inputs, like in predictive processing, but also functioning as an optimal feedback controller. We talk about historical conceptions of the function of single neurons and how this differs, we talk about how to think of single neurons versus populations of neurons, some of the neuroscience findings that seem to support Mitya's account, the control algorithm that simplifies the neuron's otherwise impossible control task, and other various topics. We also discuss Mitya's early interests, coming from a physics and engineering background, in how to wire up our brains efficiently, given the limited amount of space in our craniums. Obviously evolution produced its own solutions for this problem. This pursuit led Mitya to study the C. elegans worm, because its connectome was nearly complete- actually, Mitya and his team helped complete the connectome so he'd have the whole wiring diagram to study it. So we talk about that work, and what knowing the whole connectome of C. elegans has and has not taught us about how brains work. Chklovskii Lab. Twitter: @chklovskii. Related papers The Neuron as a Direct Data-Driven Controller. Normative and mechanistic model of an adaptive circuit for efficient encoding and feature extraction. Related episodes BI 143 Rodolphe Sepulchre: Mixed Feedback Control BI 119 Henry Yin: The Crisis in Neuroscience 0:00 - Intro 7:34 - Physicists approach for neuroscience 12:39 - What's missing in AI and neuroscience? 16:36 - Connectomes 31:51 - Understanding complex systems 33:17 - Earliest models of neurons 39:08 - Smart neurons 42:56 - Neuron theories that influenced Mitya 46:50 - Neuron as a controller 55:03 - How to test the neuron as controller hypothesis 1:00:29 - Direct data-driven control 1:11:09 - Experimental evidence 1:22:25 - Single neuron doctrine and population doctrine 1:25:30 - Neurons as agents 1:28:52 - Implications for AI 1:30:02 - Limits to control perspective

In this episode of the Wonderful Leaders podcast, Dan speaks with Stewart McCulloch, CEO of Christians Against Poverty (CAP). Stewart shares his personal and professional journey, from humble beginnings in Coventry to leading international and charitable organisations. He highlights the transformative power of the local church and the importance of developing faith and character in leadership. The discussion also delves into the increasing financial crises people face today, specifically with debt, CAP's community-driven approach, and the critical role entrepreneurship can play in building resilient, flourishing communities. The discussion also covers the upcoming Wonderful North Summit event scheduled for 20th March in Bradford at Life Church, focusing on themes like innovation, restoration, and community effort.    Summary Theme of Fresh Hope, Fresh Growth Finding God in Troubled Times Journey from Poverty to CEO Personal Transformation and Faith Balancing Success and Faith Impact Stories and Client Transformations Current Financial Crisis and CAP's Role About Our Guest: Stewart became CEO of CAP on 2 January 2024, bringing extensive leadership experience in the charity and financial sectors. Previously, he led Stewardship through a period of significant growth, including acquiring Kingdom Bank, and served as Global Insurance Director for VisionFund, where he launched the world's largest non-governmental climate insurance scheme, now benefiting 10 million people in 27 countries   Listen Now: Join Dan Maudhub and guests as they discuss key topics on Christian leadership, especially where business, society and Christianity come together. Sign up to the Wonderful Leaders Newsletter Sign up to the Wonderful WhatsApp Community  

In this thunderous conclusion to our Call of Cthulhu special, the McCulloch's must fight against overwhelming odds to stop the creature that has plagued the Radiant Star and killed so many. Will they manage to destroy the Mhaighdean Mhara before more blood is spilt? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

With the robbery of The Ocean's Lament claiming it's first victim, will the McCulloch's manage to retrieve it from whatever has stolen it before more bodies start piling up? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

With the news that the Ocean's Lament has been stolen, the McCulloch's must scour the ship to find where it may have gone. Will they find it before the mystery takes a dark turn? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Set sail with the McCulloch family as they travel across the ocean, transporting a mysterious item, The Ocean's Lament, for their equally mysterious benefactor. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Mary McCulloch returns to share memorable stories from her career in law enforcement.

Constitutional Law Lecture 1 - Structure of Government and Separation of Powers Introduction This lecture provides an overview of the structure of the U.S. government, emphasizing the doctrines of separation of powers and checks and balances, alongside foundational constitutional principles like federalism, judicial review, and constitutional supremacy. Key themes include: Separation of Powers: Division of authority among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches to prevent tyranny. Checks and Balances: Mechanisms for interbranch accountability. Federalism: Division of powers between the federal government and states. Judicial Review: Courts' power to declare laws unconstitutional. Constitutional Supremacy: Federal law and the Constitution take precedence over state law. Part 1: Constitutional Foundations Overview of the Constitution: Articles I, II, and III establish legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Article VI's Supremacy Clause ensures federal law overrides state laws. Marbury v. Madison (1803) established judicial review, making courts coequal enforcers of the Constitution. Federalism: Balances federal and state authority: Federal powers: Taxation, interstate commerce, national defense (e.g., Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)). State powers: Police powers, education, intrastate commerce (reserved via the 10th Amendment). Key cases: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): Established federal supremacy and implied powers. Arizona v. United States (2012): Reinforced federal preemption over conflicting state laws. Printz v. United States (1997): Limited federal overreach on states' autonomy. Part 2: The Separation of Powers Doctrine Legislative Powers (Article I): Bicameral Congress enacts laws using powers such as: Commerce Clause (e.g., Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) expanded federal power; United States v. Lopez (1995) limited it). Taxing and Spending Power (e.g., South Dakota v. Dole (1987) upheld conditional federal funding). Necessary and Proper Clause: Authorizes laws to execute enumerated powers. Limits: Nondelegation Doctrine: Congress must set clear guidelines when delegating authority. Presentment Clause: Bills must pass both chambers and be presented to the President (INS v. Chadha (1983) invalidated legislative vetoes). Executive Powers (Article II): Includes: Commander-in-Chief authority. Appointment power (subject to Senate confirmation; limited by NLRB v. Noel Canning (2014)). Veto power and foreign affairs authority (United States v. Curtiss-Wright (1936)). Limits: Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952): Prohibited unauthorized presidential seizure of private property. United States v. Nixon (1974): Limited executive privilege, affirming no one is above the law. Judicial Powers (Article III): Supreme Court exercises judicial review (Marbury v. Madison) and hears cases involving federal law or constitutional issues. Justiciability doctrines: Standing: E.g., Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1992). Ripeness, mootness, and political questions limit courts' jurisdiction. Federal judges' independence is ensured through life tenure and salary protections. Part 3: Checks and Balances in Practice Interbranch Conflicts: Legislative Checks on Executive: Impeachment (e.g., impeachments of Johnson, Clinton, Trump). Control of funding and oversight hearings. Executive Checks on Legislative: Veto power, executive orders, and signing statements. Judicial Checks on Both: Judicial review (e.g., Brown v. Board of Education, Cooper v. Aaron (1958) reaffirmed federal judicial supremacy). Balancing National Security and Civil Liberties: Cases such as: Korematsu v. United States (1944): Upheld controversial wartime actions, later repudiated by Trump v. Hawaii (2018). Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004): Affirmed detainees' due process rights. Ex parte Milligan (1866): Limited military tribunals where civilian courts are operational. Practical Applications and Exam Strategies Hypotheticals to Consider: Delegation of power to agencies --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

A few minutes from Buskin with The Beatles episode #98 - 'The McCartney Legacy 1974-80' - with the book's co-authors Allan Kozinn and Adrian Sinclair.

Mary McCulloch shares the story of how she was left with debilitating chronic pain and few answers after enduring multiple knee surgeries over several years. When they say there's a chance of having a bad outcome even from a routine surgery, this is what they're talking about.

Joe McCulloch is the attorney for Myra Crosby. Crosby is also known as the "egg juror' and "juror 785". Crosby was dismissed from the Murdaugh jury just hours before deliberation. McCulloch, on Crosby's behalf, has petitioned the South Carolina Supreme Court to give a reason as why the court has not allowed certain parts of the Murdaugh murder trial proceedings, including en camera discussions between Judge Newman and his client, to be released to the public. McCulloch maintains it is a violation of his client's rights to not have those records released. The full interview with Myra Crosby is available in the August 28th episode "Dismissed Murdaugh Juror Speaks Out" Seton Tucker and Matt Harris began the Impact of Influence podcast shortly after the murders of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh. Now they cover true crime past and present from the southeast region of the U.S. Impact of Influence is part of the Evergreen Podcast Company. Look for Impact of Influence on Facebook and Youtube. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this podcast show, we explore with our repeat guest, Professor Dan Awrey of Cornell University Law School, his working paper “Money and Federalism” in which he advocates for the enactment of Federal legislation creating a Federal charter for non-banks engaged in the payments business, like PayPal and Venmo. The article may be accessed online at SSRN and will likely be published in a law review at some time in the future. The abstract of Professor Awrey's article describes in general terms what we discussed: The United States is the only country in the world in which both federal and state governments possess independent and yet overlapping authority for bank chartering, regulation and supervision. The roots of this unique dual banking system can be traced back to the Constitution, written almost a century before banks rose to the apex of the financial system and became the dominant source of money. Beginning with the landmark Supreme Court decision in Maryland v. McCulloch, the system has been a wellspring of jurisdictional conflict. Yet over time, this highly contested and highly fragmented system has also produced strong federal oversight and a financial safety net that protects bank depositors, prevents destabilizing runs, and promotes monetary stability. This system is now under stress. The source of the stress is a new breed of technology-driven financial institutions licensed and regulated almost entirely at the state level that provide money and payments outside the perimeter of both conventional bank regulation and the financial safety net. This article examines the rise of these new monetary institutions, the state-level regulatory frameworks that govern them and the nature of the threats they may one day pose to monetary stability. It also examines the legal and policy cases for federal supremacy over the regulation of these new institutions and advances two potential models, one based on complete federal preemption, the other more tailored to reflect the narrow yet critical objective of promoting public confidence and trust in our monetary system. Professor Awrey explained why existing state money transmitter statutes under which non-bank payments firms are generally licensed provide insufficient protection for consumers who use these firms. State money transfer statutes were created many years ago to protect consumers that were using Western Union. These laws were not designed to protect consumers that deploy non-bank Fintech companies using new technologies to transfer funds. These companies don't have access to the Federal Reserve's central payments system that banks have access to. These non-bank companies, unlike banks, are subject to federal bankruptcy law.  That increases the likelihood that consumers can lose their funds deposited in one of these non-bank companies in the event of its failure. Professor Awrey concludes that the answer to this problem is the enactment of federal legislation which would create a federal charter for non-bank companies engaged in transmitting payments. A company that is granted such a charter would have access to the Fed's payment rails and would be exempt from the federal Bankruptcy Code. Such a company would be very restricted in the types of investments it may hold. The federal charter would ideally preempt many state laws, including state money transmitter laws. We also spent some time at the beginning of the show discussing the status of FedNow, the instant payments system launched by the Federal Reserve System in July 2023. Professor Awrey was previously a guest on our podcast show on September 14, 2023 entitled “What is FedNow and its Role in the U.S. Payments System.” At that time, Professor Awrey predicted that FedNow was too little, too late and too expensive for small banks. Professor Awrey's opinion is unchanged. He noted that the Fed has so far refused to share any data about FedNow usage. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel and former practice group leader for 25 years of the Consumer Financial Services Group, hosted the podcast show.

In the last gasp before election day 2024, we're pulling back the curtain on political polling. Once again we welcome Rod McCulloch of Victory Research to our Crisis Cast chat room. We'll hear what's changed in polling over the long haul, and what's different about each of the last 3 Presidential elections. You'll learn about how pollsters deal with voter cynicism, what's REALLY wrong with negative campaigning, and why he gives candidates the harsh reality.

Stephen Wolfram answers questions from his viewers about the future of science and technology as part of an unscripted livestream series, also available on YouTube here: https://wolfr.am/youtube-sw-qa Questions include: ​​I read that recent advancements in AI research are partly based on McCulloch and Pitts's famous paper on neural nets. Do you think there are more ideas worthwhile to explore again in cybernetics? - What is the future of technology about speech recognition? - How do I know if I am speaking to a human? The future is crazy! - Future of finance! Talk about AI talking to AI for trading. - Getting an AI to understand economics seems like it'll be quite a step. - What's the difference between a computational and a mathematical model? - Have you seen Blaise Agüera y Arcas's recent paper on self-replicating programs? Published on arXiv recently. - Wouldn't chaos theory be an example of the computational case? You know the rules of the system but have to set the initial conditions to see how it plays out. - How do we prepare for the risk of bots/worms invading everyday life as we become more dependent on technology?

118 Navigating End-of-Life with Care: A Conversation with Debbie McCulloch   In this episode of Hospice Explained, host Marie Betcher, RN, invites Debbie McCulloch, a retired pharmacist and podcast host, to discuss her personal experiences with hospice and palliative care. Debbie shares insights into her life in Rosetown, Saskatchewan, her professional accomplishments, and her podcast, Older and Bolder, which highlights the stories of women navigating life beyond 50. Debbie details her late husband's battle with cancer, emphasizing the challenges and emotional toll of caregiving, while also highlighting the kindness of healthcare professionals and the valuable support they provided. The episode also explores the impact of transferring Bill from a large city hospital to a smaller community hospital, leading to improved palliative care conditions. Debbie's story underscores the importance of community involvement and the lessons learned through navigating end-of-life care, offering hope and guidance to others facing similar circumstances.   00:00 Introduction to Hospice Explained 00:38 Meet Debbie McCulloch 01:56 Debbie's Personal Journey 04:09 Bill's Health Struggles 08:19 The Role of Caregivers 14:34 Transition to Palliative Care 22:27 Final Days and Reflections 35:01 Conclusion and Takeaways   Finding a Hospice Agency 1. You can use Medicare.gov to help find a hospice agency, 2. choose Find provider 3. Choose Hospice 4. then add your zip code This should be a list of Hospice Agencies local to you or your loved one.  Hospice Explained Affiliates & Contact Information Buying from these Affilite links will help support this Podcast.   In addition you can donate to help support Hospice Explained at the Buy me a Coffee link  https://www.buymeacoffee.com/Hospice Kacie Gikonyo's Death Doula School https://hospiceexplained--deathdoulaschool.thrivecart.com/death-doula-school/ Affilitate for the Caregiving Years Training Academy:  https://www.careyearsacademy.com/ref/1096/  Affiliate for DNA is Love listeners also get a 5% discount!! https://dnaislove.com/?coupon=hospiceexplained5  The Death Deck and the E*O*L deck:  https://thedeathdeck.goaffpro.com/  Marie's Contact Marie@HospiceExplained.com www.HospiceExplained.com  

Who Knew It with Matt Stewart is a comedy game show podcast hosted by Australian comedian Matt Stewart. This episode features Annie Louey (Wedding Disasters, China Tonight), Millie Holten (Descent, Long Head) and Simon McCulloch (Stupid Old Studios, Dirt)!Check out Matt's stand up special: https://youtu.be/cWStRpI-BhESupport the show via http://patreon.com/dogoonpod and you can submit questions for the show!See the podcast/Matt live: https://www.mattstewartcomedy.com/Check out Matt's podcast network: https://dogoonpod.com/Theme song by Evan Munro-Smith, Logo by @muzdoodles and edited by Connor Schmidt! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The South Carolina Supreme Court has decided to keep under seal the files related to the removal of a juror during Alex Murdaugh's double homicide trial. The court also temporarily sealed a motion filed by attorney Joe McCulloch, who is seeking to unseal these files. McCulloch represents Myra Crosby, a former juror dismissed just before the verdict was delivered in the high-profile case. McCulloch argues that the public should have access to the records to understand what occurred "backstage" during the trial. “The public should be entitled to see what happened backstage at the first Murdaugh trial,” McCulloch said. The trial, which took place under intense scrutiny from January to March 2024, has seen ongoing legal battles regarding transparency. Crosby, dubbed the “egg juror” after leaving the trial with a dozen eggs, was removed from the jury after an investigation by the S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED). Sources suggest Crosby was leaning towards a “not guilty” verdict for Murdaugh, a stance that may have hung the jury. Crosby, however, maintains she was undecided and not entrenched in any particular position. McCulloch and Crosby initially requested a limited review of the sealed documents by counsel, which was granted in November 2023. Now, they are seeking full public access to the files. While Murdaugh's defense has agreed to the release, the prosecution, led by S.C. attorney general Alan Wilson, has declined, citing unspecified "ongoing matters." Speculation has emerged regarding why the state is reluctant to release the documents. "Why won't the state unseal?" one source asked. "Because it will prove they lied." Crosby claims her removal was part of a broader conspiracy involving attorneys and others who allegedly doxxed her to force her off the jury. She believes her dismissal was orchestrated because she might have been the one juror to hold out for a "not guilty" verdict. Former Colleton County clerk of court Becky Hill, who stands accused of tampering with the Murdaugh jury, is also under investigation by SLED. McCulloch believes that unsealing the records is crucial for public transparency. “There had been several days of proceedings backstage… just the judge, prosecution, defense lawyers, and a few witnesses, including Juror 785 [Crosby],” McCulloch explained. "Once I'd looked at those records, I believed the public should be entitled to see what happened backstage." S.C. circuit court judge Clifton Newman removed Crosby after hearing evidence from SLED. The defense claims Hill may have influenced the removal through allegations that she invented a Facebook post to justify the dismissal. Crosby and her attorney continue to push for the release of the sealed records to bring these matters into the public eye. With both sides now ordered to respond to the motion to unseal, all eyes remain on the South Carolina courts. The outcome of this motion could provide further clarity on the handling of Murdaugh's trial and whether the controversial removal of Crosby was justified. #AlexMurdaugh #MyraCrosby #JurorDismissal #SCourtSealsFiles #BeckyHill #MurdaughTrial #JoeMcCulloch Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The South Carolina Supreme Court has decided to keep under seal the files related to the removal of a juror during Alex Murdaugh's double homicide trial. The court also temporarily sealed a motion filed by attorney Joe McCulloch, who is seeking to unseal these files. McCulloch represents Myra Crosby, a former juror dismissed just before the verdict was delivered in the high-profile case. McCulloch argues that the public should have access to the records to understand what occurred "backstage" during the trial. “The public should be entitled to see what happened backstage at the first Murdaugh trial,” McCulloch said. The trial, which took place under intense scrutiny from January to March 2024, has seen ongoing legal battles regarding transparency. Crosby, dubbed the “egg juror” after leaving the trial with a dozen eggs, was removed from the jury after an investigation by the S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED). Sources suggest Crosby was leaning towards a “not guilty” verdict for Murdaugh, a stance that may have hung the jury. Crosby, however, maintains she was undecided and not entrenched in any particular position. McCulloch and Crosby initially requested a limited review of the sealed documents by counsel, which was granted in November 2023. Now, they are seeking full public access to the files. While Murdaugh's defense has agreed to the release, the prosecution, led by S.C. attorney general Alan Wilson, has declined, citing unspecified "ongoing matters." Speculation has emerged regarding why the state is reluctant to release the documents. "Why won't the state unseal?" one source asked. "Because it will prove they lied." Crosby claims her removal was part of a broader conspiracy involving attorneys and others who allegedly doxxed her to force her off the jury. She believes her dismissal was orchestrated because she might have been the one juror to hold out for a "not guilty" verdict. Former Colleton County clerk of court Becky Hill, who stands accused of tampering with the Murdaugh jury, is also under investigation by SLED. McCulloch believes that unsealing the records is crucial for public transparency. “There had been several days of proceedings backstage… just the judge, prosecution, defense lawyers, and a few witnesses, including Juror 785 [Crosby],” McCulloch explained. "Once I'd looked at those records, I believed the public should be entitled to see what happened backstage." S.C. circuit court judge Clifton Newman removed Crosby after hearing evidence from SLED. The defense claims Hill may have influenced the removal through allegations that she invented a Facebook post to justify the dismissal. Crosby and her attorney continue to push for the release of the sealed records to bring these matters into the public eye. With both sides now ordered to respond to the motion to unseal, all eyes remain on the South Carolina courts. The outcome of this motion could provide further clarity on the handling of Murdaugh's trial and whether the controversial removal of Crosby was justified. #AlexMurdaugh #MyraCrosby #JurorDismissal #SCourtSealsFiles #BeckyHill #MurdaughTrial #JoeMcCulloch Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

The South Carolina Supreme Court has decided to keep under seal the files related to the removal of a juror during Alex Murdaugh's double homicide trial. The court also temporarily sealed a motion filed by attorney Joe McCulloch, who is seeking to unseal these files. McCulloch represents Myra Crosby, a former juror dismissed just before the verdict was delivered in the high-profile case. McCulloch argues that the public should have access to the records to understand what occurred "backstage" during the trial. “The public should be entitled to see what happened backstage at the first Murdaugh trial,” McCulloch said. The trial, which took place under intense scrutiny from January to March 2024, has seen ongoing legal battles regarding transparency. Crosby, dubbed the “egg juror” after leaving the trial with a dozen eggs, was removed from the jury after an investigation by the S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED). Sources suggest Crosby was leaning towards a “not guilty” verdict for Murdaugh, a stance that may have hung the jury. Crosby, however, maintains she was undecided and not entrenched in any particular position. McCulloch and Crosby initially requested a limited review of the sealed documents by counsel, which was granted in November 2023. Now, they are seeking full public access to the files. While Murdaugh's defense has agreed to the release, the prosecution, led by S.C. attorney general Alan Wilson, has declined, citing unspecified "ongoing matters." Speculation has emerged regarding why the state is reluctant to release the documents. "Why won't the state unseal?" one source asked. "Because it will prove they lied." Crosby claims her removal was part of a broader conspiracy involving attorneys and others who allegedly doxxed her to force her off the jury. She believes her dismissal was orchestrated because she might have been the one juror to hold out for a "not guilty" verdict. Former Colleton County clerk of court Becky Hill, who stands accused of tampering with the Murdaugh jury, is also under investigation by SLED. McCulloch believes that unsealing the records is crucial for public transparency. “There had been several days of proceedings backstage… just the judge, prosecution, defense lawyers, and a few witnesses, including Juror 785 [Crosby],” McCulloch explained. "Once I'd looked at those records, I believed the public should be entitled to see what happened backstage." S.C. circuit court judge Clifton Newman removed Crosby after hearing evidence from SLED. The defense claims Hill may have influenced the removal through allegations that she invented a Facebook post to justify the dismissal. Crosby and her attorney continue to push for the release of the sealed records to bring these matters into the public eye. With both sides now ordered to respond to the motion to unseal, all eyes remain on the South Carolina courts. The outcome of this motion could provide further clarity on the handling of Murdaugh's trial and whether the controversial removal of Crosby was justified. #AlexMurdaugh #MyraCrosby #JurorDismissal #SCourtSealsFiles #BeckyHill #MurdaughTrial #JoeMcCulloch Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com