Podcasts about Wigmore

A group of travellers have won a landmark legal case against Medway Council to stay on a park and ride site.The families were given permission to stay on the land in Wigmore for three months from July 2023 is they paid a weekly fee, then were ordered to leave in the October.Reporter Davina Jethwa has been following the story and joins the podcast with all the details.Also in today's episode, a Maidstone drug dealer has been jailed after video was found of a manufacturing lab that was used to make tens of thousands of ecstasy pills.Video at KentOnline shows footage that was discovered on Jamie Stacey-Evans' phone.Leaders in Sevenoaks have been told their days in charge are numbered after nine Conservative councillors quit the party.They've formed a new group called West Kent Independents and the Tories no longer have overall control of the authority. Hear from the leader of the Lib Dems in the area.Inspectors have reported significant changes at a Kent school previously criticised for the number of fights and high levels of truancy.Ofsted have been back to Sandwich Technology School to check on safety, behaviour and attendance. Simon Sharples took over as headteacher in January and has been telling us about their success.A petition has been launched to protect five oak trees on the Hoo peninsula from a potential road widening scheme.It's feared developers behind plans for a new 760-home estate near High Halstow could chop down trees on Christmas Lane.Events are taking place in France to mark the 85th anniversary of one of the most incredible rescue missions during the Second World War.Privately owned Little Ships from England were used to collect Allied soldiers from beaches at Dunkirk in 1940. Reporter Gabriel Morris is in Dunkirk.And in sport, Ashford United's Gary Lockyer has collected the award for scoring the most goals in this season's FA Cup.The 32-year-old netted 10 during their campaign to the third qualifying round.

In this episode, Jim Garrity talks about a tactic of some examining lawyers that should, but often doesn't, draw objections that their questions are “argumentative.” So, what is an improper, argumentative question or examination? Here, we're not talking about the questioner's tone or demeanor, i.e., arguing in the classic sense of yelling and bickering with the deponent. We're talking about questions where lawyers aren't really asking a question designed to elicit facts but are instead injecting their own commentary or viewpoint, or injecting insults, taunts, wisecracks, or similar language. "Argumentative" objections are objections to the form, and must be timely made or are waived.SHOW NOTESPeople v. Pawar, No. G037097, 2007 WL 477949, at *2 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 15, 2007) (“[W]ere they lying” queries are improper if they are merely argumentative. (Chatman, supra, 38 Cal.4th at pp. 381, 384.) In Chatman, the prosecutor asked the defendant how the safe at a store was opened. (Id. at p. 379.) The defendant replied “he could not say; he never touched the safe,” eliciting the prosecutor's query, “ ‘Well, is the safe lying about you?' “ (Ibid.) The Supreme Court held the question of whether an inanimate object was “lying” was argumentative , defining argumentative inquiry as “speech to the jury masquerading as a question” which “does not seek to elicit relevant, competent testimony, or often any testimony at all.” (Id. at p. 384.))Faile v. Zarich, No. HHDX04CV5015994S, 2008 WL 2967045, at *3 (Conn. Super. Ct. July 10, 2008) (Webster's. . . in the closest relevant definition, defines “argumentative” as “consisting of or characterized by argument: containing a process of reasoning: controversial”)Pardee v. State, No. 06-11-00226-CR, 2012 WL 3516485, at *6 (Tex. App. Aug. 16, 2012) (Steven Goode, et al., Texas Practice Series: Courtroom Handbook on Texas Evidence § 611 cmt. 12 (2012); see United States v. Yakobowicz, 427 F.3d 144, 151 (2d Cir.N.Y.2005) (defining argumentative as “summation-like remarks by counsel during the presentation of evidence”); accord Eddlemon v. State, 591 S.W.2d 847, 851 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1979) (trial court did not abuse discretion in finding the question, “You don't believe your own offense report?” argumentative). In other words, an argumentative objection concerns whether counsel is attempting to “argue” the case, not whether the counsel is “arguing” with the witness”)United States v. Yakobowicz, 427 F.3d 144, 151 (2d Cir. 2005) (“During the presentation of evidence one of the most commonly sustained objections is that a particular question is argumentative, Fed.R.Evid. 611(a) advisory committee's note to Subdivision (a) to 1972 Proposed Rules, and any summation-like remarks by counsel during the presentation of evidence are improper and subject as a routine matter to being stricken, Mauet & Wolfson, supra, at 30”)Pardee v. State, No. 06-11-00226-CR, 2012 WL 3516485, at *6 (Tex. App. Aug. 16, 2012) ("Many common law objections—including the objection of “argumentative”—are incorporated in the Texas Rules of Evidence. The common law argumentative objection is now governed by Tex.R. Evid. 611 which concerns the mode of interrogation and presentation. The argumentative objection is an objection commonly used, but not commonly understood. Pardee argues the objection should have been sustained because the State was “arguing” with the defendant. Argumentative, though, does not concern counsel's demeanor or tone. Professors Wellborn, Goode, and Sharlot explain the argumentative objection as follows: Counsel may not, in the guise of asking a question, make a jury argument or attempt to summarize, draw inferences from, or comment on the evidence. In addition, questions that ask a witness to testify as to his own credibility are improper.")People v. Chatman, 38 Cal. 4th 344, 384, 133 P.3d 534, 563 (2006) The prosecutor's question about whether the safe was “lying” requires a different analysis. The question was argumentative. An argumentative question is a speech to the jury masquerading as a question. The questioner is not seeking to elicit relevant testimony. Often it is apparent that the questioner does not even expect an answer. The question may, indeed, be unanswerable. The prosecutor's question whether “the safe [was] lying” is an example. An inanimate object cannot “lie.” Professor Wigmore has called cross-examination the “greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.” (5 Wigmore on Evidence (Chadbourne rev. ed.1974) § 1367, p. 32.) The engine should be allowed to run, but it cannot be allowed to run amok. An argumentative question that essentially talks past the witness, and makes an argument to the jury, is improper because it does not seek to elicit relevant, competent testimony, or often any testimony at all. Defendant had already explained he had no explanation for the safe being open. Asking whether the safe was “lying” could add nothing to this testimony”)People v. Imbach, No. E040190, 2008 WL 510482, at *7–8 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 27, 2008) ("The prosecutor asked, “You found that to be inappropriate but not your other son's addiction to child pornography?” When defendant objected that the question was argumentative, the trial court overruled that objection. Defendant asserted the second “argumentative” objection when defendant's mother said she did not know how to answer that question and the prosecutor asked, “Is that because you didn't want to know?” The trial court sustained the defendant's objection to this second question. Both questions are argumentative, because they both are speeches by the prosecutor masquerading as questions. (Chatman, supra, 38 Cal.4th at p. 384.) The trial court should have sustained both objections. However, we cannot say that by asking those two questions the prosecutor engaged in misconduct.")People v. Peoples, 62 Cal. 4th 718, 793–94, 365 P.3d 230, 288 (2016) (“Defendant observes that the prosecutor asked numerous argumentative questions when cross-examining defense witnesses. To list a few examples, the prosecutor asked defense expert Dr. Lisak, “how many hours are you into them for?” He said to defense expert Dr. Buchsbaum, “Let's quit guessing for awhile and look at the facts.” He said to defense expert Dr. Wu, “It's a pain in the butt to get these test scores.” And he asked prosecution expert Dr. Mayberg, “Did you have a heart attack last night when you looked at the raw data?”)People v. Burns, No. D081051, 2024 WL 2144151, at *15–17 (Cal. Ct. App. May 14, 2024), review denied (July 17, 2024) (excessive repetition of a question simply to make a point can cross line into improper argument”; “Burns makes a strong argument that the prosecutor's repetitive questioning regarding the drunk tank incident became argumentative. “An argumentative question is a speech to the jury masquerading as a question. The questioner is not seeking to elicit relevant testimony. Often it is apparent that the questioner does not even expect an answer. The question may, indeed, be unanswerable.” (People v. Chatman (2006) 38 Cal.4th 344, 384.) “An argumentative question that essentially talks past the witness, and makes an argument to the jury, is improper because it does not seek to elicit relevant, competent testimony, or often any testimony at all.” (Ibid.) Instead, it may be aimed at agitating or belittling the witness (People v. Lund (2021) 64 Cal.App.5th 1119, 1148), or designed to engage the witness in an argument (People v. Johnson (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 1230, 1236)”)People v. Mazen, No. B300193, 2021 WL 164356, at *5 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 19, 2021) The court overruled defendant's argumentative objection to the following question: “Would [accidentally placing the car in neutral] been important information to tell [Morales]?” The court did not abuse its discretion when it overruled the objection. The question sought to elicit relevant testimony regarding defendant's theory that Mario was hit by accident (CALCRIM No. 510). (See People v. Chatman (2006) 38 Cal.4th 344, 384 [“[a]n argumentative question is a speech to the jury masquerading as a question” and does not seek to elicit relevant testimony].)”People v. Singh, No. H042511, 2018 WL 1046260, at *28 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 26, 2018) (“Each question anticipated an answer and was answerable; none was “a speech to the jury masquerading as a question”)People v. Basler, No. D068047, 2015 WL 9437926, at *23 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 23, 2015) ("Fung appears to identify three categories of objectionable questioning during his cross-examination by the prosecutor. The first category involves apparent sarcasm by the prosecutor. For example, after Fung provided additional details about his fight with another inmate while incarcerated, the prosecutor said, “Okay. You left that part out a couple of minutes ago; right?” Referencing the same fight, the prosecutor made light of Fung's claim of self-defense: “Did you have to defend yourself against him, too?” As another example, when Fung was discussing the extent of his injuries following the fight, the prosecutor said, “So, that's about how badly you were hurt? It looked like something you get by falling off a skateboard?” The court sustained objections to each of these questions, and a number of others, as argumentative." Also from Basler: "As we have noted, Fung contends the first two categories of questions were impermissibly argumentative. “An argumentative question is a speech to the jury masquerading as a question. The questioner is not seeking to elicit relevant testimony. Often it is apparent that the questioner does not even want an answer. The question may, indeed, be unanswerable.... An argumentative question that essentially talks past the witness, and makes an argument to the jury, is improper because it does not seek to elicit relevant, competent testimony, or often any testimony at all.” (People v. Chatman (2006)”)People v. Nanez, No. F064574, 2014 WL 1928307, at *14–15 (Cal. Ct. App. May 15, 2014) (citing examples of argumentative examination by prosecutor including (a) the prosecutor's remark “Convenient” when a witness said they did not remember a particular fact, and (b) when prosecutor commented on witnesses testimony by saying “So that's the lie you're going with?”, and (c) when prosecutor asked witness “You wouldn't tell us if you're lying, of course, right?” and when witness said he would, prosecutor replied “There's another lie,” causing court to strike prosecutor's comment from the record)People v. Strebe, No. D057947, 2011 WL 2555653, at *7 (Cal. Ct. App. June 28, 2011) (trial courses sustained objection to question as argumentative where prosecutor asked witness “Do you remember anything about that evening that might be detrimental to your case?” In essence arguing to jury that witness was lying and only selectively remembered favorable facts)People v. Higgins, 119 Cal. Rptr. 3d 856, 873–74 (Ct. App. 2011), as modified (Jan. 21, 2011), as modified on denial of reh'g (Feb. 4, 2011) (guilty verdict reversed in part due to argumentative questions; among other jabs; in case where defendant explained his conduct as motived by depression due to death of his daughter's friend, prosecutor asked, “You'd agree with me that it's pretty pathetic if you're using the memory of a dead 17–year–old kid as an excuse in this trial, wouldn't you? Would you agree with me? Is that the legacy that you want [the dead teen] to have?”; other examples of prosecutor's argumentative questions included “Oh, the door was unlocked,” and “Isn't that convenient that all of a sudden, right after you've committed the crimes, that that's when you come to?”; further held, “The rule is well established that the prosecuting attorney may not interrogate witnesses solely ‘for the purpose of getting before the jury the facts inferred therein, together with the insinuations and suggestions they inevitably contained, rather than for the answers”)People v. Dixon, No. D047342, 2007 WL 2745207, at *10 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 21, 2007)  Dixon asked Hernandez who had taken the photographs near the time of the injury. Hernandez testified that the audio-visual person at his school had taken photographs of his injury. Dixon then asked, “Is it computer enhancement? Those could be computer enhanced-.” The prosecutor interrupted, “That's argumentative.” The court sustained the prosecutor's objection")United States v. Browne, No. SACR 16-00139-CJC, 2017 WL 1496912, at *6 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 24, 2017) (For each witness, the Court did not end Defense counsel's cross-examination until it became excessively cumulative and argumentative, at which time the Court was well within its authority to restrain the questioning pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 611(a).”)Beving v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., No. 3:18-CV-00040, 2020 WL 6051598, at *12 (S.D. Iowa Sept. 8, 2020) (Defendant may object to prejudicial or argumentative references to counsel at trial as permitted by the Federal Rules of Evidence. See Fed. Rs. Evid. 403, 611(a)(3).)FRE 403: Argumentative questions may be viewed as unfairly prejudicial, misleading, or wasting time.FRE 611(a)(3), Witnesses and Presenting Evidence ((a) Control by the Court; Purposes. The court should exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of examining witnesses and presenting evidence so as to: (1) make those procedures effective for determining the truth; (2) avoid wasting time; and (3) protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.FRCP 30, Depositions, (d) Duration; Sanction; Motion to Terminate or Limit. (3) Motion to Terminate or Limit, (A) Grounds. At any time during a deposition, the deponent or a party may move to terminate or limit it on the ground that it is being conducted in bad faith or in a manner that unreasonably annoys, embarrasses, or oppresses the deponent or party. 

In this episode of ACTRA Toronto Reel Talk, IPA Bargaining Team Member Jennifer Wigmore joins host Kate Ziegler to discuss her experience as a performer and union representative, focusing on the challenges, priorities and what's at stake in IPA negotiations. Jennifer reflects on her time on the council in the 1990s, highlighting groundbreaking moments like integrating internet protections into the IPA—a reminder of the evolving nature of agreements. She underscores the importance of addressing digital streaming and residuals, citing the lack of protections for performers as streaming services dominate the industry. Jennifer also emphasizes the impact of self-tape auditions, highlighting their increased demands and hidden costs for actors. She stresses the critical need for updated language in agreements to protect performers in areas like AI, travel, and inflation while advocating for engagement by union members to ensure informed representation and collective progress. Ongoing updates about IPA Bargaining can be found here: https://actratoronto.com/ipa-bargaining/

In this episode of My Fame, Explained, we dive into the vibrant career of Jennifer Wigmore, a multidisciplinary artist whose talents span acting, writing, and visual art. Born and raised in Edmonton, Alberta, Jennifer has left her mark on stages and screens across Canada and beyond. Jennifer is currently captivating audiences as Chief of Police April Anderson in the highly anticipated James Patterson series Cross (Amazon Studios & Paramount Pictures). With an impressive list of credits, including Dream Scenario with Nicholas Cage, Malory Towers (CBBC), Y: The Last Man (FX), and Anne with an E (Netflix), her versatility knows no bounds. But Jennifer's artistic prowess doesn't stop at acting. She's an award-winning visual artist whose paintings—both figurative and abstract—explore the intersections of performance and pedagogy. Her art has been featured in collections across Canada, the U.S., and England, and she even won Bravo's Star Portraits with a painting of Canadian icon Gordon Pinsent. As a passionate advocate for artists, Jennifer co-founded AACE (Association of Acting Coaches and Educators) and works tirelessly to uplift the artistic community. In this conversation, we explore her journey from Edmonton to the global stage, her commitment to fostering the next generation of artists, and her latest creative projects, including a screenplay and a play in development. Whether you're an aspiring artist or a fan of her work, Jennifer Wigmore's story will inspire and empower. Follow Jennifer Wigmore on Instagram Follow Larry Gilbert on Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow the My Fame, Explained podcast on: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube

Host Jo Reed and AudioFile's Robin Whitten discuss an audiobook that explores the history and meaning of train travel. Canadian actor Jennifer Wigmore has a lovely narrating voice and a pleasing tone. She narrates in an informational yet personal style that fits this immersive and deeply researched meditation on the delights of watching the landscape flash by while reading, writing, or daydreaming in the cocoon of a rail car. Author Pamela Malloy reveals much about the history of train travel, while also recounting her own long rides through Canada and Europe. Read the full review of the audiobook on AudioFile's website. Published by ECW Press. Discover thousands of audiobook reviews and more at AudioFile's website. Support for AudioFile's Behind the Mic comes from Dreamscape Media and their exclusive audiobook, Rifts and Refrains. Dive into the compelling story of Amara Johnson, a talented musician uncovering her family's hidden past while finding love and legacy in Nashville. To start listening, visit Dreamscape Publishing. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

According to current cognitive psychology and neuroscience understanding, our memories are multilayered constructs composed of personal experiences and information acquired from external sources. So, when questioning witnesses about their recollections, it's crucial to understand what those layers are made up of. Is it purely personal recollection? Does it include what they were told by others? Does it include what they were told when their lawyer prepped them for the deposition? Examining the underlying sources or layers of the deponent's knowledge helps identify the individuals and documents that influenced and possibly biased what the witness says.Be sure to click through to our home page if you don't see the complete list of cites in the show notes. And - please - leave us a 5-star review wherever you hear this podcast? It's a free, fast, and incredible way to thank our production team for the research and time spent producing this free resource for you. Our whole team thanks you!SHOW NOTESIn re FirstEnergy Corp. Sec. Litig., No. 2:20-CV-03785-ALM-KAJ, 2024 WL 1984802, at *14 (S.D. Ohio May 6, 2024) (“Seemingly, FirstEnergy argues that all facts about the internal investigation are privileged or protected because, at some point, these facts were communicated by lawyers to various individuals. Time and again, courts have rejected this type of argument. While communications between attorneys and clients are privileged, facts are not. Humphreys, Hutcheson and Moseley v. Donovan, 755 F.2d 1211, 1219 (6th Cir. 1985) (citing Upjohn Co., 449 U.S. at 395). And facts do not become privileged or protected because they were provided to witnesses by attorneys or acquired in anticipation of litigation. See, e.g., Protective Nat. Ins. Co. of Omaha v. Commonwealth Ins. Co., 137 F.R.D. 267, 280 (D. Neb. 1989) (“There is simply nothing wrong with asking for facts from a deponent even though those facts may have been communicated to the deponent by the deponent's counsel.”); United States v. BAE Sys. Tactical Vehicle Sys., LP, No. 15-12225, 2017 WL 1457493, at *5–6 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 25, 2017); Basulto v. Netflix, Inc., No. 22-21796, 2023 WL 3197655, at *2–3 (S.D. Fl. May 2, 2023) (“[F]act-oriented discovery is permitted even if the witness learned about the facts from her attorneys.”); Clear Cast Grp., Inc. v. Ritrama, Inc., No. 1:09-cv-169, 2011 WL 13334451, at *6 (N.D. Ohio Sept. 15, 2011). So too here. Facts related to the internal investigation are not shielded simply because they were funneled through attorneys to witnesses”)Protective Nat. Ins. Co. of Omaha v. Commonwealth Ins. Co., 137 F.R.D. 267, 278–79 (D. Neb. 1989) (citing Sedco Intern., S.A. v. Cory, 683 F.2d 1201, 1205 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1017, 103 S.Ct. 379, 74 L.Ed.2d 512 (1982) for the proposition that “No contention can be made that the attorney-client privilege precludes disclosure of factual information. The privilege does not protect facts communicated to an attorney. Upjohn Co. v. United States, 449 U.S. 383, 395–96, 101 S.Ct. 677, 685–86, 66 L.Ed.2d 584 (1981). Clients cannot refuse to disclose facts which their attorneys conveyed to them and which the attorneys obtained from independent sources. *279 Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 508, 67 S.Ct. 385, 392, 91 L.Ed. 451 (1947); 8 J. Wigmore, Wigmore on Evidence § 2317 (McNaughton rev. 1961).State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. New Horizont, Inc., 250 F.R.D. 203, 214 (E.D. Pa. 2008) (quoting In re Linerboard Antitrust Litig., 237 F.R.D. 373, 384 (E.D.Pa.2006) (“ ‘[T]here is simply nothing wrong with asking for facts from a deponent even though those facts may have been communicated to the deponent by the deponent's counsel.' ” (quoting Protective Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Commonwealth Ins. Co., 137 F.R.D. 267, 280 (D.Neb.1989))).)State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. New Horizont, Inc., 250 F.R.D. 203, 215 (E.D. Pa. 2008) (“Contrary to State Farm's contention, the mere fact that counsel for State Farm may have provided such information to the witness in preparation for the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition does not convert the information into attorney work product.7 Were State Farm's logic followed to its full extent, anytime an attorney is involved in preparing a Rule 30(b)(6) witness, such preparation would be futile because the witness would inevitably be precluded from testifying to anything learned from the attorney. Were this the rule, every Rule 30(b)(6) deposition in which an attorney was involved in preparing the witness would be doomed from the start”)Palmisano v. Paragon 28, Inc., No. 21-60447-CIV, 2021 WL 1686948, at *6 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 7, 2021) (“Thus, while the privilege applies when a questioner directly asks a deponent about discussions with counsel, the “attorney-client privilege simply does not extend to facts known to a party that are central to that party's claims, even if such facts came to be known through communications with counsel who had obtained knowledge of those facts through an investigation into the underlying dispute.”)Thurmond v. Compaq Comput. Corp., 198 F.R.D. 475, 483 (E.D. Tex. 2000) (requiring disclosure of facts defendant “only learned through communications with counsel”)Kansas Wastewater, Inc. v. Alliant Techsystems, Inc., 217 F.R.D. 525, 528, 532 n.3 (D. Kan. 2003) (“It is well established that a party may not withhold relevant facts from disclosure simply because they were communicated to, or learned from, the party's attorney.”).Elizabeth Loftus, prominent figure in the study of human memory, particularly on malleability of human memory and misinformation effects. Loftus, E.F. (1975). Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 560–572; Loftus, G.R. & Loftus, E.F. (1976). Human Memory: The Processing of Information. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates; Loftus, E.F. & Doyle, J. (1987). Eyewitness Testimony: Civil and Criminal. NY: Kluwer; Loftus, E.F.; Hoffman, H.G. (1989). Misinformation and memory: The creation of memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(1), 100–104.Daniel Schacter, research on the “seven sins” of memory and the constructive nature of memory. Books include Searching for Memory: The Brain, the Mind, and the Past (1996); Forgotten ideas, neglected pioneers: Richard Semon and the story of memory. (2001);[4] and The Seven Sins of Memory: How the Mind Forgets and Remembers (2001)Charan Ranganath, Why We Remember: Unlocking Memory's Power to Hold On to What Matters

This is a special live episode that was recorded at the Amon Carter Museum of American Art in Fort Worth, Texas. The event was centered around the museum's ongoing exhibition titled Trespassers: James Prosek and the Texas Prairie, and the episode features a fascinating on-stage conversation with artist and past podcast guest James Prosek and art curator Spencer Wigmore. - Trespassers is an exhibit about grasslands– specifically, James examines how we think about and define America's imperiled prairie ecosystem. Over the course of more than two years, James traveled throughout Texas and the Southern Plains, visiting private ranches and urban restoration sites, and he was often accompanied by some of Texas's most well-renowned grasslands experts. He investigated ideas around how our man-made boundaries and concepts attempt to define grasslands, and how grasslands often do not conform to our desires to control them. He examines ideas around fire, species classification, conservation, and natural history, and the end result is a collection of more than 20 mind-blowing paintings and sculptures. - As the curator for this exhibit, Spencer played a very unique role throughout the entire project– he was the one who initially approached James with the idea, he accompanied James on many of his grasslands road trips, and he even arranged the exhibit in its stunning space within the museum. So I loved learning about the collaboration between artist and curator, how they complimented each other's personalities, and how they ultimately worked together to bring this spectacular collection of meaningful art into the world. - As you probably remember from my first podcast conversation with James, he's a deep thinker who has spent his entire career digging into the nuances of our natural world. And Spencer's depth of understanding of art history and the artistic process– as well as his ability to communicate his knowledge in a fun and engaging way– is second to none.  So I know you'll enjoy this conversation that covers everything from broad, big-picture ideas around the philosophies of defining species, all the way down to the details of how James created such intricate, delicate sculptures. Be sure to check out the episode notes for a full list of everything we discussed. - I'd encourage you to visit the episode webpage, as I have included a gallery of images of the exhibit that will serve as a great reference point for some of our discussions. And the nice folks at the Carter also recorded a video of the entire event, that is embedded on my webpage and available on Youtube.  Follow the link in the notes to access all of that. - The episode starts with a kind introduction from The Carter's Manager of Adult Programming, Madeleine Fitzgerald and then James, Spencer, and I begin our conversation.  I hope you enjoy! --- Amon Carter Museum of American Art Trespassers: James Prosek and the Texas Prairie James Prosek Spencer Wigmore Watch the YouTube video Full episode notes and links: https://mountainandprairie.com/carter/ --- TOPICS DISCUSSED: 3:00 - Welcome statements 10:45 - How the Trespassers exhibition came about in Spencer's mind, and how it landed for James 19:15 - Comparing American grasslands to the Great Pyramids 23:45 - James' painting process 29:15 - Spencer's role as curator 34:00 - Discussing the work Fort Worth Composition No. 1 37:45 - Discussing James' interest in silhouettes  42:30 - James' use of bronze to depict burned logs 47:00 - James' clay flowers 50:15 - The biggest surprise in this project for Spencer 54:00  -What James has learned about grasslands since finishing the project 1:01:15 - James' read on the state of western grasslands conservation 1:06:15 - James' book recommendations  1:09:30 - How Spencer sets up the gallery space 1:14:00 - Audience questions begin 1:14:45 - Spencer's and James' relationship to Fort Worth, and whether or not they found remnant prairies there 1:20:00 - Where Spencer and James feel the anti-fire bias came from? 1:23:30 - Inquiring about the significance of a Rio Grande Cutthroat Trout in one of James' works 1:26:15 - Whether or not James or Spencer did some fly fishing as a part of their research for this project --- ABOUT MOUNTAIN & PRAIRIE: Mountain & Prairie - All Episodes Mountain & Prairie Shop Mountain & Prairie on Instagram Upcoming Events About Ed Roberson Support Mountain & Prairie Leave a Review on Apple Podcasts

In this episode of the Physician Empowerment Podcast, Dr. Kevin Mailo engages in an insightful conversation with Christian Wigmore, a medical student at UBC and the mastermind behind Budget Your MD. Together, they illuminate the critical role of financial literacy within the realm of medical education and practice. The discussion spans pivotal topics such as navigating student debt, management of lines of credit, and the influence of interest rates.Christian introduces his business, Budget Your MD, a debt projection tool and visual aid that empowers medical students to foresee their financial trajectory across various scenarios. The discourse places a strong emphasis on cultivating balanced financial habits that harmonize with professional ambitions, family life and personal dreams. Christian envisions a future where financial education seamlessly integrates into medical curricula, fostering a supportive community for open financial discourse within the medical community. Such an initiative, he believes, will play a pivotal role in alleviating burnout issues among physicians, ensuring a brighter, more empowered future for the medical profession as a whole. By melding financial wisdom with medical expertise, Christian and Dr. Kevin Mailo discuss how physicians can work toward a more prosperous and balanced lifestyle in the world of healthcare.About Christian Wigmore During Christian's first year at UBC Medical School, he noticed the lack of financial education integrated into the curriculum. Recently completing his double degree in Business and Biology, the importance of financial literacy heading into medical school was top of mind. He thought… we will be running small businesses and managing our personal finances in 6 years. Understanding the basics of finance is crucial to ensure we don't A) get taken advantage of by financial institutions and B) don't end up losing all the money we make in the process. All this, and much more, led Christian to start Budget Your MD. He tends to think of it as a passion project that he is slowly building as he progresses through medical school. Noticing the topics and problems his colleagues are interested in at each stage in the game. Christian hopes to one day play an integral role in changing how finance is discussed in the medical field. To not avoid these conversations, but rather dig deep to help one another live our best financial lives as physicians (because if we're being honest, our finances play a role in our health and wellness).--Physician Empowerment: website | facebook | linkedinChristian Wigmore/Budget Your MD: website | instagram | email |--Transcript: Dr. Kevin Mailo 00:01Hi, I'm Dr. Kevin Mailo, one of the CO hosts of the Physician Empowerment Podcast. At physician empowerment, we're dedicated to improving the lives of Canadian physicians, personally, professionally, and financially. If you're loving what you're listening to, let us know we always want to hear your feedback. Connect with us. If you want to go further, we've got outstanding programming, both in-person and online. So, look us up. But regardless, we hope you really enjoyed this episode. Dr. Kevin Mailo 00:34Hi, I'm Dr. Kevin Mailo, one of the CO hosts of the Physician Empowerment Podcast. And I have today with me, our guest on the pod, Christian Wigmore. And I'm not introducing him yet as Dr. Christian Wigmore, because Christian is a medical student at UBC. And he founded a very interesting venture called Budget Your MD, and I wanted to share it because Christian connected with me over social media, we got talking, we had one of those great phone calls that I think was supposed to be probably five or 10 minutes. And it wound up being like an hour or two talking life, talking dreams, talking finance, talking career. And then of course, Christian joined us at our conference in 2023, and it was amazing to meet him in person. And we've stayed in touch ever since. So, I'm very glad to have you here, Christian. I love your passion. I love what you're trying to do for your fellow learners but I think there's a lot of wisdom here for us going through our careers, like I'm a mid-career physician, and I love your message. So, tell us a little bit about like your background. Tell us a little bit about what you were doing before medical school. And what you did you know, once you entered medical school? Christian Wigmore 01:41Okay, well, first off, super glad to be here. I can think back to when I messaged you first on, I think it was LinkedIn. And I think I might have messaged like six or seven other people, no answers, but you answered me right away, and then we get on that phone call. And then off we go to the conference in May. It's been cool to get to know you. It's so yeah, super glad to be here. So yeah, my name is Christian. I'm a fourth-year medical student at UBC. My journey has been pretty centred around medicine to start. I knew kind of in high school, I wanted to do medicine, you go to university, you do the sciences. But funny enough, like if you are UBC grad or you know how UBC medical school works, you get to drop your worst year. And I met my wife in second year and got like the worst grades.Dr. Kevin Mailo 02:27Was it worth it?Christian Wigmore 02:31Oh, well, I'm still married to her, right? So, I got the worst grades that year and I knew I needed to have a little bit extra time before that bad year can be dropped before getting into medical school. So I was like, What am I going to do? I grad with a science degree, that's going to leave me doing what? I know I don't really have an interest in something outside of medicine with a science degree. So, why not start taking some business courses, right? So I started doing business courses, and I realized, wow, I kind of liked this stuff. And you know, that wheel starts turning and I realized, okay, maybe if I start doing summer courses and push a little harder, I can grad with a science and a business degree. And so that ended up taking me five years. And after that, I found a small little internship in the midst of COVID with a financial advisor and kind of was able to be his associate and just watch the way he ran his business. And it wasn't only finance, but it was kind of more of like the operation side and entrepreneurship that really started to make me realize that there's that world out there. Like they don't teach any of that in science, you don't really learn any of it in high school. And so that got me excited. But that year I got into medical school, right? And that's the golden ticket everyone's waiting for is they think about medicine. And so after medical school, I went, but I guess over that time, the business mind was still kind of ticking at times. Dr. Kevin Mailo 03:46So, when calls that the white coat, black suit mentality, right? Do you wear the white coat when you're in your clinical work and the black business suit when you're managing your finances or your practice? So yeah, keep going, keep going. Christian Wigmore 04:01Totally. So like, I think originally, I was always believing that I would kind of wear that black coat, I guess like in my own personal finances, thinking about the ways that I'll eventually run a corporation through my medical practice or something like that. But what I started to notice is just the lack of any financial topics, discussion, or education at medical school. And then I realized I have friends around me that didn't necessarily have that same mind. And I said, Well, why don't we start talking about this stuff more? What? Why is this something that's never spoken of? The preceptors we work with don't really talk about it. And sure it maybe doesn't apply to us immediately as a first-year medical student, but eventually it will. So, when will this part of our education come into play? And I speak to people higher up than me, doesn't really seem like it's ever happening. And then I said well, you know, between studying and doing other things I kind of like finance and I probably know enough that I can make a few Instagram posts, so I start Budget Your MD is the name that I call it, right? And start to make little infographic posts and see how it goes. And at that time, it's still slow growing, and students are slowly finding out about it. But what I find is, as I go through each year of medical school, I'm able to see the questions, and topics and interests that students would have at that time. Like, I'll give an example in first year, it's the line of credit, like, what does that mean? I all of a sudden have been given sorry, $350,000 from a bank. What does that look like for me as a medical student? What is interest? How does interest even work? And you know, which bank offers the best package? And so that's kind of what I've used as an area to at least keep people interested on things that they're currently going through. And as now I go into fourth year, I realized disability insurance questions like that. Things that come up that are these decisions that require a little bit of financial savviness to understand, are being put on people's plates, right?Dr. Kevin Mailo 05:58I love that and so, you know, what are some of the big issues that and let's go a little bit beyond medical students to, you know, residents to fellows, people in early year practice. What are some of the struggles that people face in these early years? Because I think the big one for medical students is blowing through that line of credit, right? I remember, when I went through, it was low, ultra-low interest rates following the financial crisis, right? And so it was like how wasn't that bad, but interest rates have gone up massively, right? And so we have learners that are struggling with the thought of this interest piling up. But we also have a lot of physicians who have personal lines of credit used for consumer purchases, and it went from being tolerable to being very painful. If you think of it this way, and there's just little thing, and then we'll get back to the interview. But if you have a personal line of credit that you used for whatever home renovations or consumer purchases, whatever it is, and that line of credit is $1,000 a month of service, it's like $2,000, having earned because you have to pay personal tax on the money that you're going to use to service your line of credit. So, that's a really big hit. That's like working, you know, a whole long, busy clinic day, at a minimum, just to service that line of credit without even paying down the balance, right? So people are starting to feel the pinch of interest rates. But let's go back a little ways. And just talk me about what it is some of the issues that you see in you know, people that are now going through residency, although there's a little bit of income coming in, but there's a little bit of tax planning that has to start to begin. And also like in those early years of practice? Christian Wigmore 07:40Yeah. It actually reminds me of, I spoke with, I think it was the residence of doctors of BC when I think one of their whether it's the president or not, he showed me a presentation, at one point about the debt levels that residents have, when they start residency, this might just be BC specific, and when they end. And my thought had always been well, it would go down, right, like they finally started. Like you should be able to kind of work it down a little bit. 50% of it goes up, but of the students, 50% of residents will have more debt when they finish residency. And so things that mean, you have always talked about, but like, let's think it's got to be something rather than actually needing the fancy car or needing something. It's a mindset, potentially that's causing people to do this. Now, we always have to, like put in disclaimers, there's family circumstances, things that are out of–Dr. Kevin Mailo 08:33Yeah, I mean, when you're like in my household, when we were both going through medical school, we paid the nanny more than I made. Because we were both working like 80 hours a week and we had young kids and she was hitting overtime by Wednesday afternoons. So, yeah, you're right there, family circumstances, totally. And personal circumstances. Christian Wigmore 08:51There's potentially a mindset, right? And I have this funny little line that I heard from a physician at one point, and it goes, “If you spend like as a doctor, when you're a student, you'll live like a student when you're a doctor.” And that one hit me right away, right? Because it's that thought that if you blow up the line of credit through medical school, and you finally get into practice, and you think that pearly white income that you'll eventually earn will pay it all off, you start to realize that all that spending you did as a student, basically wrecks any of the beauty of having a higher income, I guess, as a doctor, eventually. Dr. Kevin Mailo 09:26And there's a huge tax penalty now, right? Like, that's the other reflection I have, you know, in your generation compared to mine, like, I mean, and it was even better years ago. But, you know, I graduated like 15 some years ago, it have been 10 years in practice. So, what am I, totally getting my numbers wrong. It'd been 10 years in practice, but like I was, you know, at a place where like, we could pay down the line of credit relatively easy with income splitting through the PC, and dividends to spouse. Personal Tax rates were lower and now it's different. And the cost of living has gone up, right? So, your base cost for food, clothing, shelter, transportation has gone up. So, there's less and less margin to pay off personal debt, right? Between taxes and the cost of living. And you're right, it's so critical to get this right in the early years of practice. Christian Wigmore 10:20Yeah, and I feel like what we're talking about here is just it's like, it's personal financial management. Like we're, there's kind of like, there's personal finance, and there's like your corporation management, all that fun, financial things that like we could all learn as doctors, but it's the personal side, the personal financial management that's so important. That could begin right as they get into medical school as they go through medical school, into residency, and then into practice. That is honestly the saving grace that appears like these days to save you from some of the hardships of feeling like you have to go to clinic every single day, or work that extra call shifts to pay for all the luxuries that have kind of built up over time, right? And so that's what I think of as like the end game in a sense when I see myself and I see the students around me of thinking about what do the decisions that we make right now as students and kind of the habits in a sense too that we make right now as students and the expectations that we make about what it'll be like when we start to make money. How that will actually impact our career, and how we can still be as healthy as possible as doctors in not only our lives as physicians serving our patients, but also in our financial lives, right? Dr. Kevin Mailo 11:35I couldn't agree more and it's so important to get that alignment right. Between what are your career goals and your personal goals, right? Because if you say, you know, I want to be healthy, I don't want to work in excessive number of hours, I want to minimize the number of call or night shifts I'm doing or whatever, or clinic days I'm doing in a month. Well, you have to have financial goals that align with that. Because if you don't, well, you know, I mean, your mortgage company doesn't care. You know, what, how many hours you want to work in a week that mortgage comes due every month, right, or the grocery bill or whatever else you're facing. And so it's again, it's being holistic in our lives, and looking across and seeing Okay, well, what do I really want? And then what financial decisions am I making that align with it? Especially the big ones, right, like mortgage and those kinds of things, like the big permanent purchases. Christian Wigmore 12:30Yep. Yeah. It's interesting and I think it like it ties in to, you know, we are offered this $350,000, when we've never had money before, there's like that aspect of like, quickly, your life-changing in the financial world. But then I assume, you know, I'm still like, early in the game, but I assume the moment I start making an income that is substantial enough, the bank's gonna come to me and say, Hey, here's this fancy mortgage, you can have it and but this million dollar house, and they make you feel like you can afford it. Because, in a sense, if you're willing to sell your life, you can, right? And it's those trip falls are like the traps that I think are just so important to be educated on as we're going through, to be aware and know the implications, right? Dr. Kevin Mailo 13:13And this is also another thing that we teach us at the conference. And I alluded to this, you know, when you were there as well Christian, is the notion of an hourly rate. Every one of us has an hourly rate, what we're worth per hour what we can bill. Remember that there's a tax penalty associated with that, right? So, if you're, you know, if you're billing $300 an hour, your after-tax income on that is actually going to be substantially less. So, when you say, how many 1000s of dollars do I have to pay on a mortgage every month and property taxes, and utilities, and maintenance, and repairs, and vehicle payments? Well, now you can actually calculate and, you know, I'm happy to show anyone that's interested, how many hours in a month you're gonna have to work just to maintain those big expenditures, right? And then how many hours are left for fun? And the bigger one is, how many hours are left to save for retirement? Which again, the sooner we start, the sooner we are better off. But if we if you know, we're struggling for 5 or 10 years to pay off a line of credit, then we've already really short in the compound growth curve, which is so vitally important not to do. Christian Wigmore 14:25Yeah, and something that like, is underrated and not maybe spoken about as much is student loans nowadays, like the government has announced that they're not charging interest on those. So, we already have it easier than the previous like, the generations before us, right? Like my student loans right now, if things don't change, I don't pay interest on it ever. Like I just have to make the minimum payment and it doesn't go up over time. Like that is a huge advantage. Dr. Kevin Mailo 14:50That's a good deal. Christian Wigmore 14:51I know, yeah, pretty sweet. Yeah, almost say thanks to the guys over the line that did it first and then Canada felt like they had to follow suit, but like, yeah, the only interest-bearing debt that we're going to have coming out of is the line of credit. And you have to jump into that a little bit to pay tuition, the student loans never cover it fully. But it is still a variable cost in my mind of kind of your lifestyle and things like that, that really push that number up. Dr. Kevin Mailo 15:18It totally. And I mean, I'm sympathetic to it as well. I mean, you know, when you consider, you know, broader, you know, sort of North American or Canadian society, there are very few people that are forced to delay gratification the way doctors are. Like, some of us go a decade or longer in school. In fact, it's actually much longer some of us regularly go like 15 years from undergrad to practice. Like that is a very long road, right? And it's natural to want the nice things in life. Right? You actually do deserve them, right? The message here isn't, you know, that you've got to live this extremely austere existence, that it's craft dinner and ramen noodles every night. No, it's, there's just got to be some balance, right? Because there's a very real cost to that lifestyle creep and remembering that if we're 10 years behind the average adult in entering, practicing and earning in our prime, it's also 10 years that we've lost on the compound growth curve. Again, it's another big impact. Christian Wigmore 16:25Yeah, I've used the example sometimes with students, as we kind of talked about our debt of what would it look like if you just became a red seal electrician right off the bat, and you saved 15% of your income over time? The amount of time it would take us as physicians, who are thought to have made/make so much more money than a red seal electrician to catch up to that person is incredible. I don't know the math in my mind, I'm not that much of a whiz. But like, it would take so long to catch up to that person for the compounding that they would achieve over those years that we're studying. Yeah. It blows my mind sometimes. But that just only solidifies the point of just good, sound, basic financial knowledge, just for basic, like, you know, your own finances, things like that. Dr. Kevin Mailo 17:10And the other reflection is, you know, again, another observation about younger generations coming through, they don't want to work the 70-80 hour workweeks that older generations of physicians have worked. And I actually think that's a wonderful thing. I think that's an example to the entire profession, that we should all be working fewer hours. The job is stressful, we deal in people's lives, and more should be spread, more duty should be spread across a larger group of physicians. Absolutely, right? It shouldn't be two rural physicians holding up a town, you know, in a remote part of Canada. It should be four, do you know what I mean? And this applies everywhere across our healthcare system. But again, if we're going to cut back those hours, our finances have to align with that broader goal. And so it's about like being mindful and intentional. And reflecting on what do we really want our ideal work week to look like? Because yours was actually very interesting. I really liked yours. You don't have to share it. But it was great. It was really balanced. Christian Wigmore 18:14Yeah, I'm happy to share like my dream in the future. Like, I think, first and foremost, for myself, like this is getting a little bit more personal into how I feel. I'm like a family man first. I've always been that way. Like, my dream is to be able to go to my daughter's soccer–Dr. Kevin Mailo 18:27I love it. Trust me, do it all. Christian Wigmore 18:29–basketball game. Like that's–Dr. Kevin Mailo 18:27That's wonderful. Don't miss any of those moments. Sorry, I'm going on and on. Christian Wigmore 18:34–I want to be able to drive my son and his buddies to the basketball game and hear them get hyped up to some Eminem or something on the way to the game. Like I want to be there for those moments, right? And so I think like, if I could work clinic two-three days a week, and then have two or three days a week that are more flexible, that they could be, you know, those moments with my kids, or be moments where I'm getting to pursue Budget Your MD and kind of push those things forward.Dr. Kevin Mailo 18:58A passion.Christian Wigmore 19:00Yeah, exactly. That gives me the balance, right? That allows me to really be the doctor, I want to be on those two to three days. And then be the dad I want to be hopefully, be the husband I want to be, and then still kind of use that other part of my brain that sometimes has to be shut off at times. Right? Dr. Kevin Mailo 19:15I absolutely love it. What an inspiring message. So okay, let's tell us a little bit more about Budget MD. We touched on and then we went on on all these tangents. Tell me a little bit more like what what do you do right now with it?Christian Wigmore 19:31So, the thing that I would say we provide or I provide the most value on is something I call the debt projection tool and I know of honestly centers around everything we talked about today. And I made it originally for myself, I was just interested, okay, if I have this much debt currently, and say I want to go into family practice, which is what I want to go into, or what if I want to do internal med or ER. What would those differing incomes look like in terms of eventually being able to pay off my line of credits, my student loans? Like how long would it take me to get to financial independence and if I want to save a little bit along the way? And so I took some Excel courses through my business degree and know three or four formulas. So, it's not the cleanest Excel spreadsheet in the world, but it works. And what I allow myself to do is to plug in, okay, this is my age, this is the specialty I might think of doing. And I even have like the house I may want to buy it some age, the interest rate that approximately it could be at at that time, and the downpayment, I could approximately have, and I even have in there, how many kids I would want to have. I just do an average, I think it's like just under $14,000 a year for a kid from the age of like, zero to 18. I've never been a parent before, so, I have no idea. That's what I found on the internet, right? So, maybe it skews a little bit more expensive into the later years as you're paying for universities and stuff if that's something you want to do versus the beginning. But you can correct me if I'm wrong there. But basically, the goal of this tool is to help what I find to be two groups of students. And this is what I get passionate about, there's students that are, A. super worried about their finances, like I've met a few that like, I have so much debt, I'm never gonna be able to pay it off. Dr. Kevin Mailo 21:09That was me. Christian Wigmore 21:10It's hurting their ability to learn. And I'm like, you're gonna be fine. Like, you actually need to be told that, like you're doing a great job, and like be able to move on with just learning and know that things are going to be okay, that's one group. And then the other group is the, oh, I'm going to be a doctor one day, it's completely fine. Yeah, I do DoorDash every single night because like, you know, we'll make a good income at some point and pay it off. And so it's those two groups that fill up this debt projection that I have, and kind of give their example scenarios. And I can show them well, okay, person A, that's worried about their life, you're going to be okay. You're like this is kind of your projection, approximately, like none of this is exact, but it gives them an idea that the debt will eventually get paid off and kind of eases some of their worries. Group two sees on their projection that with their current debt and spending, the curve only just continues to go up, it's almost like, you're not going to be able to pay all this off. And coincidentally, they're the people that say they want to buy a $3 million house, and then that mortgage payment really causes the curve to continue up as well. But it, my goal with that is to just start the conversation, right, is to get that part of there, get the light switch moment to go and realize that, okay, the current habits and mindset I have, are maybe a little bit off from what I need to currently be doing to make sure I'm setting myself up to succeed, not only as a physician, but in my own independent financial life. Dr. Kevin Mailo 22:39I love it. Christian Wigmore 22:40So, that's my big like, that's the one I really have fun with because I kind of like Excel, and they send over the projection, I do it completely for free, and I send it to them. And then I offer them 30 minutes to chat about it too if they want to. And so, that's been super fun. It's kind of an extra thing I'll do in the mornings or the evenings, I'll fill those out for people. It's not AI-generated at all, at this point. So, I'm still collecting some things together on my own computer, but I'm one of those rare breeds that likes to see an Excel spreadsheet. So Dr. Kevin Mailo 23:10Yeah, I love it. So, where do you want to go with it? Right? Because obviously, we're gonna hear more about it. You're in the early stages. Where do you want to go with it? Like, what's your dream, in terms of the profession? Christian Wigmore 23:22Yeah. So, my dream, in terms of the profession would be to like, almost not solve but help in the world of, you're gonna get my mind going too fast here, Kevin, when you ask me what my dreams for this thing like, it's so like–Dr. Kevin Mailo 23:41No, no. Like, I just did a podcast episode on dreams. It'll come out before this one. I'm a very big believer in being open about our dreams. So, talk about your scope. Christian Wigmore 23:55So, like a broad dream would be to change the way that financial education is brought into the medical programs across Canada. Like let's start Canada first, we don't need to go worldwide. I don't need to dream that big. Like if we could somehow incorporate financial education into the undergraduate medical degree, and whether that just be evenings or a lunchtime money talk or something to not only help students become aware of the pitfalls as they transition into residency and practice. But also just to be aware of kind of the habits that we've been speaking to a lot over the past, I don't know how long we've been–Dr. Kevin Mailo 24:37I love it. Yeah.Christian Wigmore 24:40So I mean, that's the number one goal, right? And then after that, like, I hope that that could evolve into like a better community in medicine that is willing and I think Physician Empowerments already absolutely spearheading this, but a community where doctors feel more safe to talk about this stuff, right? Like, it's rare, like as a student, have I ever had a preceptor bring up, you know, billing or how they're like clinic rents and stuff like that? No, I haven't. And if there could be a community where students can ask about this stuff, where people further down the line can give advice about these are the some of the mistakes I made as a student. And that doesn't have to be like physician to student that can be, you know, 20 years experience position to first five years practicing physician, just the space like that would be awesome. Just to provide that advice and care almost for the future generation of physicians. And I think in general, the dream, like, macro of all of that, is that that could then some, in some way help aid like the issues that we see in medicine as a whole right now, like the burnout issues, like that's the big word. Dr. Kevin Mailo 25:48Oh, without question. Christian Wigmore 25:50And I think me and you align on this that, like if personal finance, can be focused on more and physicians understand how that binds them, I think we can, hopefully, turn the dial a little down on the burnout rates. And that's the goal, right? Like, that's the hot word these days. And in medicine, practicing physicians is burnout, right? Dr. Kevin Mailo 26:10Yeah, I'll just go on, I'll go climb on my, you know, pedestal on this one and go. I teach wellness, right, that's one of the things we teach at Physician Empowerment, and I've done CME events for it. And I'm going to be blunt. I mean, you can do all of the mandated wellness modules online, that the system tells you to do. You can do yoga, you can journal, you can meditate, I do all of those things, you can do all of that. But if you are unhealthy, working 70 hours a week, no amount of extra stuff you do is going to make that better. If you're healthy number of hours a week is 40, then you just have to come down, the only way to come down is to be financially secure. Financial Security underpins all wellness, in our profession, in my opinion. The other big one, and we sort of touched on this before we started recording, was leadership. When we want to transform the system and make it better for our patients, better for us, better for our allied health colleagues, we need to be involved. We need to be able to sit on those committees, we need to advocate, we need to be a voice, we need to be present, truly present. That will only happen when we're cutting down on 70-hour work weeks, and we have a little bit more balance to get involved. Again, truly believe that and again, that is underpinned by financial security. Christian Wigmore 27:37Yeah, and, you know, it almost feels odd as a student right now talking to a physician who's current practicing to like speak about this financial stuff, because it almost feels weird, to be honest. Like we're doctors. And I think at the conference, Wing spoke about this, about where there's this altruistic mindset that's kind of ingrained in us that we're supposed to just work like crazy and not think about the finances, because we're serving, and I 100%, like, have that heart to serve. But I think it's gotten to a point these days where like, you have to start to think about that weird financial pit in your stomach because it has all these implications we've been speaking to, right? Dr. Kevin Mailo 28:16You will do your best care when you are not burnt out, when you are not exhausted, and when you're not overbooked and worrying about the overhead. That is what your patients deserve. A rested physician who is in control of her/his schedule, that's what's so powerful. And that's what will lead to better patient care. So, to serve, it means to serve ourselves first or to be to be our healthiest first is in my opinion. Christian Wigmore 28:42Yeah. And like, honestly, Kevin, I appreciate you saying all that. Because I think that some of the mindsets I've come to I would never be able to come to just as a fourth-year medical student, you know, learning–Dr. Kevin Mailo 28:54It's hard to talk. Christian Wigmore 28:55Yeah, it is. And like, No, there's no medical student out there that's thinking about these things. We only hear of it from people like you and Wing and all these other physicians that are starting to talk about this stuff that we can begin to create some of these ideas of important topics and frameworks that it will matter later down the road. But what's so awesome about this conversation is that hearing them then allows you to have the advantage of applying them early. I think that's the key that I get excited about. Because talking about them, you know 10 years into practice is awesome and super important, has a role but there's such an advantage to thinking about it or like–Dr. Kevin Mailo 29:32I couldn't agree more. I couldn't agree more. Christian Wigmore 29:35Because you're making lifetime decisions. Even the specialty you go into like that's bigger than the house you end up buying, the house you end up buying it's high up there too, but the specialty end up choosing, like think about this stuff like it. That's your life like you're signing, we're all in medicine to–Dr. Kevin Mailo 29:50It's very hard to retrain.Christian Wigmore 29:51Think about your life to go do that, like be ready. You know what I mean? Dr. Kevin Mailo 29:52Very hard to retrain. I'm envious of our nursing colleagues who are able to cycle through different aspects of nursing over the course of their career in health care. Because we really struggle with that in medicine, it's very hard to retrain, and understandably so I mean that there has to be a lot of technical proficiency. So, I thought this is absolutely amazing. I would encourage listeners to check out Budget Your MD. I know more is coming from you, Christian. That's why we want to bring you on the show because this is going to be a lot more than just medical students and residents, right? I think all of us should be going through this exercise. So, get building those spreadsheets, no I'm just bugging you. No, we look forward to the other offerings that are coming. And you do so much education as well. I know over Instagram and other other places. So, I again, encourage people to check it out because it's the what you teach is so true. And it's been great connecting, and great having you on the show. So, we'll we'll definitely have you on again. Christian Wigmore 30:49I appreciate your mentorship. Thanks for having me on. It's been so good to chat about some of these things. Dr. Kevin Mailo 30:54Wonderful. Dr. Kevin Mailo  30:56Thank you so much for listening to the Physician Empowerment podcast. If you're ready to take those next steps in transforming your practice, finances, or personal well-being, then come and join us at PhysEmpowerment.ca - P H Y S Empowerment dot ca - to learn more about how we can help. If today's episode resonated with you, I'd really appreciate it if you would share our podcast with a colleague or friend and head over to Apple Podcasts to give us a five-star rating and review. If you've got feedback, questions or suggestions for future episode topics, we'd love to hear from you. If you want to join us and be interviewed and share some of your story, we'd absolutely love that as well. Please send me an email at KMailo@PhysEmpowerment.ca. Thank you again for listening. Bye.

This week at Senior High, Chris joined us to open God's word! We looked at Mark 3 and how Jesus opposes evil and yet calls us family. This talk was recorded at Senior High on Sunday 17th September 2023.

Get ready to dive into the heart and soul of punk culture with our latest episode! We sit down with Chris Wigmore, a passionate force behind the collective of "Punk: Rage & Revolution." exhibition in Leicester' This extraordinary showcase goes beyond punk history, from its '70s origins while also shining a spotlight on Leicester's local punk scene too. In this conversation, Chris takes us on a journey through the essence of the exhibition as well as her own love of the punk scean. We also talk about the epic Punk Weekender thats taking place from August 18th to the 20th featuring film screenings, Q&A sessions, and live shows with iconic bands like Buzzcocks and UK Subs. For more information click this linkWhether you're a die-hard punk fan or just diving into the scene, this episode is an absolute must-listen. Thank you to Fidlar for not suing us and letting us use Cheap Beer as the podcast's opening track.Tracks played on the podcast in order of play:X-Ray Spex - I Am a PoseurThe Damned - Smash It UpThe Clash - Know Your RightsThe Slits - I Heard It Through The GrapevineFollow the podcast @punksinpubs across all social media and give us a rate and review while you are at it. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Seven hundred years ago this August, Roger Mortimer broke out of the Tower of London and went on to mastermind the deposition of his captor and arch-enemy, Edward II. In conversation with Spencer Mizen, Paul Dryburgh explains why he believes the hugely talented baron was one of the most remarkable characters in medieval history – and could have cemented his status as the most powerful man in England, if only he hadn't let that power go to his head. (Ad) Paul Dryburgh is the author of The Mortimers of Wigmore, 1066-1485: Dynasty of Destiny (Logaston Press, 2023). Buy it now from Amazon: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mortimers-Wigmore-1066-1485-Dynasty-Destiny/dp/191083965/?tag=bbchistory045-21&ascsubtag=historyextra-social-histboty The HistoryExtra podcast is produced by the team behind BBC History Magazine and BBC History Revealed. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

At the Mzanzi National Philharmonic concert next Saturday at which the main work will be Mahler's Fifth Symphony conducted by Marin Alsop, the first half will feature dramatic soprano arias sung by Masabane Cecilia Rangwanashe who is based in Europe and who has been dazzling audiences with her radiant voice. She has just sung the Four Last Songs of Richard Strauss at a Proms concert in London and works regularly with Antonio Pappano at the Royal Opera House. Masabane has given solo recitals at the Wigmore hall and has appeared in Washington, Hamburg, Dresden, Atlanta and Chicago. I managed to get her on a zoom connection for this week's People of Note.

M. Chatillon a été déclaré coupable d'un chef d'agression sexuelle sur une enfant. Cette condamnation a été principalement basée sur des aveux qu'il a fait aux professionnels qui l'évaluaient, dans le contexte d'une démarche entièrement volontaire en thérapie pour recevoir des soins en lien avec des problèmes liés à l'abus de substance et de déviance sexuelle. La question qui se posait était de savoir si les aveux étaient protégés par un privilège en droit criminel, question à déterminer selon le cadre d'analyse Wigmore.Le juge du procès a conclu que cette preuve était admissible suivant ce cadre d'analyse, estimant que les professionnels avaient l'obligation de dénoncer les comportements de M. Chatillon à la Direction de la protection de la jeunesse, nonobstant le secret professionnel qui caractérise la relation thérapeutique.Les juges majoritaires de la Cour d'appel du Québec ont plutôt déterminé que les aveux étaient inadmissibles en preuve, suivant leur propre analyse des critères du test de Wigmore. L'appel a été accueilli et M. Chatillon acquitté. Le juge dissident aurait rejeté l'appel au motif que les aveux étaient admissibles, puisque non protégés par un privilège. La dissidence a estimé qu'en consentant à la divulgation de ses aveux, M. Chatillon a explicitement renoncé au caractère confidentiel de ceux-ci.

This is the second show episode that went out today and I talk Feldenkrais & everyday stress and tensioning:   Here is the link to the lesson: Warning sound is a little muffled, recording issues!! Feldenkrais BSMA and Stress Management Lesson Here is the text:   Hello this is Jill Wigmore-Welsh here from Reading in Berkshire just introducing you to another installment of this wonderful Legacy Project centering on the Feldenkrais method and the applications in terms of your everyday practice.   So I'm really going to be talking today about the brain and central nervous system and the emerging science, neuroscience. So when you're listening into this recording today I don't know who you are I don't know what your background is I don't know what knowledge and experience you have of your body of your brain of science so it can be a challenge to know who I can pitch this talk too However, let's imagine that I am just talking to my next door neighbor or the average person who comes to see me in my clinical practice my treatment room. The room I have in my home, that's the place where people come to see me because they have problems.   Most all of the people who come to see me don't know anything about the structure of their body they don't know anything much about physiology biology bones joints muscles , ligaments . They don't know much about the science behind how their body works.   They come to see me when they have a problem and that problem may be a pain, it may be a problem with movement, it may be a problem sleeping, it may be a problem with overthinking, worrying, procrastinating. Whatever it is, it's something that's happening in their life and they're not happy and they want a solution.   Most always during the course of time that I work with people I introduce some of the principles and theories that I've learned from the Feldenkrais method. It has it's roots in neuroscience. He studied neuroscience, but not MRI scans because they didn't exist back then. He learned from scientists. As you probably know I've been studying the Feldenkrais method since 1992. I completed my Feldenkrais Method practitioner training back in 1999 and I've completed many advanced trainings since..   So today we're going to be talking about using the Feldenkrais work and it's application to your everyday stress. That's right the everyday stress that you have as you go about your day-to-day activities.  A little bit of stress is good for us if you don't have any stressful activities or anything at all a really our system doesn't work particularly well so a little bit of stress is okay episodes of quite a bit of stress is also something that most of us can handle but when you have stress and on going stress that lasts and lasts and lingers and that may be being caused by money relationships your health there are many many reasons that you could have underlying ongoing low grade stress that is just grinding and grinding and grinding away.   When we react and respond to things that we find are stressful we automatically go into that fight flight or freeze response and that is well recognized we used to just say fight or flight but now we know that there is freeze as well   When you experience ongoing stress you may not notice that your physiology your body is actually responding to that ongoing stress you may not notice it because it becomes so normal for your system to be responding that you just don't realize there's any other way to be   One of the most powerful effects of stress is on the way that we contract our muscles in response. We contract our muscles as a form of protection If you're getting ready to fight imagine what you would do you'd be tensing your muscles you possibly be making a fist you'd be bending your arms you be tightening your shoulders you be focused on what it is that you're going to do   Imagine that you're driving down the motorway and as you drive down the motorway you've had a stressful day at work and you're driving through the traffic As you drive through the traffic you've got more and more people pushing in front of you pulling in moving over. What you start to notice is that the hazard signs are showing that says the whole of that big motorway freeway I suppose if we were talking about America is going to shut. Lanes are going to close, “ah no!” even more stress begins to start to kick in. You start to think “I'm going to be late I'm going to be delayed I need use the bathroom oh no!” and that stress that tension starts to magnify as it starts to magnify you begin to contract your muscles even more   If you've been contracting your muscles without realizing it for a long time there comes a point where you just don't notice. You don't notice that you're gripping the steering wheel you don't notice that your elbows are bent and tight you don't notice that your shoulders are contracted you don't notice that you are holding your breath that you're tensing your legs that you're furrowing your brow that you're clenching your jaw. You don't notice because it's so habitual for you   But what you may notice is that you begin to start to get pain or you begin to start to feel as if you've got discomfort in your belly or your back. It might even be that you begin to start to feel as if you want to shout or scream. It may be that you do find yourself shouting at other drivers in cars or banging the steering wheel because you're getting so annoyed   Every day stress that builds up over a period of time is not good for your health.  The tension that you can't feel, that you're not aware of, is going on all the time, and its stopping the blood from flowing through your tissues. As you contract your muscles the blood vessels within the muscles become compressed and squashed making it more difficult for the blood to flow through Our combination of moving so that the muscles alternately contract and relax as you swing and flow your arms helps to keep that blood flow moving smoothly through all of your tissues. Without good oxygenated blood traveling through your system going to every part of your system, cells are going to start to be low on oxygen they're going to become unhealthy   One of the best ways that you can help yourself to become very much more aware of your muscle tensioning of your physiology of your biology of your body and the messages that you're feeling in your body is to actually practice some of the work that the Feldenkrais Method.   Today I'm going to record a short lesson to help you discover how you can start to break that pattern of tensioning your muscles and how you can change your biology.   Come along and do the lesson I look forward to talking to you again next week when I'll be online and I look forward to bringing you more installments of ways in which you can think of using this work to help your health   For now from me to you, this is Jill here in Reading in Berkshire have a lovely day and look after yourself

This Body Sensing & Movement Awareness Lesson is an introduction to a way you can use simple moves from the Feldenkrais Method to de-stress and recalibrate   These days, in the workplace, there's a lot of attention placed on becoming more resilient. Which is interesting because sometimes when you are under stress when you're life is stressful and it's an ongoing event what happens is that over time that ongoing stress can just cause all kinds of mental and physical body breakdowns. So what would it be like for you to actually be able to start to detect much more easily and much more quickly when life is getting to you when life is making you feel stressed?   Try this short set of processes and discover how much you tension during the day. As you develop your body awareness you can have another tool in your toolbox to keep yourself to stay healthy and well.   Contact me if you have health problems and want to have some help.  

(PUBLICATION BAN) After a trial in the Court of Québec, the respondent, Olivier Chatillon, was convicted of one count of sexual assault of a child. The trial judge held that the prosecution's case could be based on the admissions made to the professionals who had assessed him, although he had met with them during an entirely voluntary therapeutic process to receive treatment for problems associated with substance abuse and sexual deviance. The Court of Appeal, for the reasons given by Vauclair J.A. and concurred in by Healy J.A., granted the motion for leave to appeal, allowed the appeal and acquitted the respondent. It declared that the admissions were inadmissible in evidence based on its analysis of the Wigmore criteria for privilege. Mainville J.A., dissenting, would have dismissed the respondent's appeal on the ground that the admissions were admissible because they were not privileged. By consenting to the disclosure of his admissions, the respondent had expressly waived their confidentiality. Argued Date 2023-03-15 Keywords Criminal law - Evidence, Admissibility - Criminal law — Evidence — Admissibility — Admissions — Wigmore test — Whether majority of Quebec Court of Appeal erred in law in finding respondent's admissions inadmissible on ground that they were privileged under Wigmore test. Notes (Quebec) (Criminal) (As of Right) (Publication ban in case) Disclaimers This podcast is created as a public service to promote public access and awareness of the workings of Canada's highest court. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Court. The original version of this hearing may be found on the Supreme Court of Canada's website. The above case summary was prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch).

The Alexander Yania lesson series is a classic set of lessons, sometimes they can need a little interpretation because the transcriptions are direct from speech. Their would have been a whole class, a group of up to 50 taking the lesson at the same time. So sometimes Moshe would have been commenting on what he could see different people having difficulty with.  I've split the whole lesson in two, because lessons can be quite long, the second half will be up later today, recording time permitting.  The second half is now up, sorry the quality isn't so good, I think Audacity refused to sense my Yeti microphone, However it's done Here is the link to part 2  I am looking to start some personal development training and teaching this movement work, so if that interests you send me a message to jill@wigmore-Welsh  or pop over to my website JillWigmore-Welsh.com where there is a contact form.  It's been 33 years since I first encountered this work, and high time I started running more courses in this work. I term my work Body Sensing & Movement Awareness BSMA because that's what it is. Let me know how you get along!

Jennifer's relationship with acting is a long story, which is a testament to her passion and creativity. She came from a creative, artistic family and grew up acting, then left the profession only to come back to it later in life. Tune in to this episode of the Second Act Actors podcast to learn more! Jennifer shares her perspective on living creatively and tells me why she thinks that all actors need both a community and another outlet for their creativity, to combat the loneliness that can come with being an actor. We also discuss how you can mark your progress as an actor and why you shouldn't dwell on whether or not you have talent.  Later in the episode, Jennifer tells me about her activism through AACE (Association of Acting Coaches and Educators) and why she's campaigning to create consent based practices and standards for students and teachers to provide safe working environments for classrooms and coaching studios. . Listen out for our interesting discussion about what oversight you should have as an acting teacher and for Jennifer's words of wisdom for acting teachers! If Jennifer's words inspired you to develop your own craft, then please show your love for the Second Act Actors podcast by subscribing and leaving a review.Links Association of Acting Coaches and Educators Second Act Actors websiteSecond Act Actors on InstagramSecond Act Actors on FacebookSecond Act Actors on YouTube Janet McMordie websiteJanet McMordie on InstagramJanet McMordie on LinkedInJanet McMordie on Twitter Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Are you an acting coach but can't find a community to guide you? Are you an acting educator who wants to update your teaching skills and knowledge?  In this week's episode, Actor/Painter/Teacher/Activist, Jennifer Wigmore would take us on a journey on how AACE was established to create a community amongst acting coaches and educators in Canada. AACE members share best practices and create standards for performers and workers in the entertainment industry. Together we can make acting training safer and  more empowering for everyone! In this episode: How an unfortunate casting experience evolved into Jennifer's green light to quit acting. How pursuing another artistic passion lead Jen to discover all creative endeavours are drawn from the same well. Just because you're a good actor doesn't mean you're a good teacher; sometimes your acting experience does not correlate into good teaching skills. The conversations about what we need to know as acting coaches and educators have changed so much that everyone needs to update their knowledge about how to create respect based classrooms and how not to hurt people. A little about Jennifer: Jennifer is a multidisciplinary artist in acting, writing, and visual art, and has worked for over twenty years as a professional artist. She has performed in theatre's across Canada including The Arts Club, Citadel Theatre, Tarragon Theatre, Theatre Center, Canadian Stage Company and the Stratford Festival. Jennifer has also appeared in numerous television series and films including; Dream Scenario, Christmas as the Drive In, The Winter Palace, Y: The Last Man, Malory Towers, Adult Adoption, Happy Place, Designated Survivor, Anne with an E, Impulse, Killjoys, Suits, Kart Racer, Little Men, and I Was a Sixth Grade Alien. She has just been cast as Chief April Anderson in the highly anticipated series Cross, based on James Pattersons novels, starring Aldis Hodge. She also narrated Todd Babiak's novel, The Spirits Up. She completed her BFA and MFA at OCAD University and continues to work as an acting coach and educator as well as a painting instructor. In addition to being a core member of the activist group Got Your Back, Jennifer is also a coordinator and steering committee member for AACE – The Association of Acting Coaches and Educators. Jennifer is also currently writing her first play called Measure Follow Jennifer! Online: jenniferwigmore.com,  aactingcoacheseducators.com Instagram: @jenniferwigmore @jenniferwigmoreart @aactingcoacheseducators Facebook: Jennifer Wigmore Jennifer Wigmore Art AACE – Association of Acting Coaches and Educators  

Merlin's Beard! What better topic to talk about as we enter the springtime and the regeneration of the land than Excalibur and the legend of Arthur, King of the Britons, who is prophesied to restore the land to verdance and glory and who knows much about the average velocity of unladen swallows. But we'll not be focusing on that particular cinematic incarnation of the once and future king. We'll be talking about the operatic 1981 John Boorman film Excalibur, which boldly attempts to condense a significant amount of Thomas Malory's 15th century manuscript, Le Morte d'Arthur, into two and-a-half hours of dreamlike cinema.Joining us to talk through this is the fantasy author Bryan Wigmore, best known for his ongoing fantasy series The Fire Stealers, comprising The Goddess Project (2017), The Empyreus Proof (2018), and the forthcoming third instalment, The Mandala Praxis. With Bryan we discuss Arthur's connection to the land, what the Holy Grail represents, why it appears in the story when it does, and the mysterious figure of the Fisher King. We discuss the explicitly Christian imagery, the use of opera music in the score, the preponderance of Irish accents in a story about the King of the Britons (clue: it was filmed in County Wicklow); the scalable aspect of the Arthurian story, Merlin's pratfalls, and Brian Blessed's head.We also talk about Bryan's own work and its foundation upon such ancient myths as these; his use of the land and the environment, the question of timing a publication to retain its topicality, and the bones of myth. We also talk about his forthcoming YA fantasy series called Earthwyrms, which leans heavily upon the Arthurian mythos, and we pester him for an update on when The Mandala Praxis will be ready.Elsewhere, The Judge throws down her own gauntlet and challenges us to trial by combat, and how that strange aspect of the ancient judiciary came to be, and how the trial by combat we see in such films as Excalibur might work in reality.We also hear Paranoid Marvin's victorious 75-word challenge entry from February, and The Judge's winning entry to the January 300-word writing challenge. Finally, a certain King Of The Britons is perturbed and discombobulated when he is approached by the Lieutenant Bungalow of the Martian space force for a rare interview.

On International Women's Day, our Archivist Emily Woolf explores the trailblazing, influential, unpredictable, and occasionally outrageous women in Wigmore Hall's history. From Ethel Smyth to Ellen Terry, Yvette Guilbert to Yvonne Arnaud - not to mention dancers, lecturers and the occasional psychic - hear their stories, their words and music, and discover their place in the story of the Hall.

Link to bioRxiv paper: http://biorxiv.org/cgi/content/short/2023.02.24.529873v1?rss=1 Authors: Matchett, K. P., Wilson-Kanamori, J. W., Portman, J. R., Kapourani, A., Fercoq, F., May, S., Mackey, J. B., Brice, M., Zajdel, E., Beltran-Sierra, M., Sutherland, E. F., Wilson, G. C., Wallace, S. J., Kitto, L., Younger, N. T., Dobie, R., Oniscu, G. C., Wigmore, S. J., Ramachandran, P., Vallejos, C. A., Carragher, N., Simpson, K. J., Kendall, T. J., Rule, J. A., Lee, W. J., Hoare, M., Weston, C. J., Marioni, J. C., Teichmann, S., Bird, T. G., Carlin, L. M., Henderson, N. C. Abstract: The liver has a unique ability to regenerate however in the setting of acute liver failure (ALF) this regenerative capacity is often overwhelmed and emergency liver transplantation is the only curative option. To advance our understanding of human liver regeneration and to inform design of pro-regenerative therapies, we use paired single-nuclei RNA sequencing (snRNAseq)combined with spatial profiling of healthy and ALF explant human livers to generate the first single-cell, pan-lineage atlas of human liver regeneration. We uncover a novel ANXA2+ migratory hepatocyte subpopulation which emerges during human liver regeneration, and a corollary migratory hepatocyte subpopulation in a mouse model of acetaminophen (APAP)-induced liver regeneration. Importantly, interrogation of necrotic wound closure and hepatocyte proliferation across multiple timepoints following APAP-induced liver injury in mice demonstrates that wound closure precedes hepatocyte proliferation. 4-D intravital imaging of APAP-induced mouse liver injury identifies motile hepatocytes at the edge of the necrotic area, enabling collective migration of the hepatocyte sheet to effect wound closure. Depletion of hepatocyte ANXA2 expression reduces HGF-induced human and mouse hepatocyte migration in vitro, and abrogates necrotic wound closure following APAP-induced mouse liver injury. Taken together, our work dissects unanticipated aspects of liver regeneration, demonstrating an uncoupling of wound closure and hepatocyte proliferation and uncovering a novel migratory hepatocyte subpopulation which mediates wound closure following liver injury. Therapies designed to promote rapid reconstitution of normal hepatic microarchitecture and reparation of the gut-liver barrier may open up new areas of therapeutic discovery in regenerative medicine. Copy rights belong to original authors. Visit the link for more info Podcast created by Paper Player, LLC

Saga has announced it's going to close its headquarters in Kent. The over-50s travel and insurance firm has a large base in Sandgate near Folkestone. Reporter Rhys Griffiths explains why the decision has been made and the reaction to it. Also in today's podcast, a Medway man has been jailed for 12 years for his part in a knifepoint robbery at the home of Olympic cyclist Mark Cavendish. Expensive watches were taken from the property in Essex in November 2021. A Kent mum whose baby was stillborn at just 20 weeks has told the podcast how she would have had a breakdown, if it hadn't been for the support from a Kent charity. A scan last November revealed baby Brynn had passed away and she was born at Medway Maritime. Cheryl Griffiths was able to spend time with her baby in the hospital's bereavement suite funded by Abigail's Footsteps. It's Internet Safety Day and a new programme is going to be running in Kent to make sure children have healthy relationships online. Workshops will be put on in schools to teach pupils how to spot things like coercive behaviour, bullying or harassment. A Medway toddler has rung a bell to mark the end of his cancer treatment that started just weeks after he was born. Tadhg Mealey from Wigmore had a small lump under his left eye which doubled in size within days. And, as the cost of living crisis continues, the owner of shop in Herne Bay has decided to give everything away for free. Maya's Free Shop has donated clothes, handbags, pillows, candles and even paintings that have all been made available for no charge at all.

Do you like new & unique sounds? Well boy howdy have we got an album for you to check out. This week, our Album Review series continues and this time it's Michelle's turnt to bring something to the table. Michelle choose an artist from New Zealand named Gin Wigmore and her third effort "Blood To Bone". Gin brings influences from all sorts and genres along with a new/fresh sound to her third album. Michelle & Russ have had the pleasure of seeing Ms. Wigmore in concert, so we've got some thoughts to share about that too. Listen in as we talk through what we like, what we don't like and what think you'll like about this fantastic artist. It's Season 7, Episode 15 of your best friends brother Larry's favorite music podcast, the Infectious Groove Podcast!

This talk was recorded at Senior High on Sunday 27 November 2022.

Though relatively short, the 2022 book The Prophet of Harvard Law: James Bradley Thayer and His Legal Legacy (UP of Kansas, 2022) by Andrew Porwancher, Austin Coffey, Taylor Jipp, and Jake Mazeitis, is jam-packed with information about late 19th and early 20th Century legal history and the professionalization of American legal education. This is a moving tale of a professor whose acolytes included some of the giants of American jurisprudence (e.g., the judges and justices Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Learned Hand and the legal scholars John Henry Wigmore and Roscoe Pound). Even those not directly taught by Thayer, such as Felix Frankfurter, lauded him as an intellectual influence. You may be thinking, “Why should I take the time to read a book about a long-dead Harvard law professor?” Well, because many of the issues that James Bradley Thayer (1831-1902) and his students grappled with have shaped almost every encounter Americans have with the law and affect our rights from the workplace to the schoolroom to the courtroom. Thayer and Wigmore, for example, did pioneering work on the laws of evidence. Hand did the same on the topic of expert testimony. Holmes and Thayer thrashed out the meaning of the word “presumption” as it was used in trials. And on a grander scale, Holmes, Brandeis, and Hand were trained as thinkers on Constitutional law by Thayer. We could all do with a primer on what “living constitutionalism” is, for example. The book is also valuable for its contributions to the field of the history of education and will benefit those researching the development of professional associations and the transformation of universities like Harvard from small liberal arts institutions into major research universities. This is social history at its best. We read about how Thayer attracted bright young men from across the country who applied what they learned under their beloved mentor once they left Harvard and took up posts elsewhere (as Wigmore did as dean at Northwestern Law School) and/or played key roles in major legal cases in the Progressive Era and beyond. Economics. Labor Law. Free speech. They're all here. And “beloved” is not too strong a word for the way these titans of American law regarded Thayer. Early career academics in any field who need a role model of a dedicated teacher could do worse than study the life of James Bradley Thayer. He was the subject of admiration and gratitude decades later by influential men who credited him with providing moral support and practical help when they were first starting out and for setting a standard of learning and hard work that they applied in their judicial and academic careers. Thayer was a networker and mentor par excellence. The book is interesting in itself apart from its subject in that it is a joint work by a professor (Andrew Porwancher) and three of his former students. That is a project worthy of note and something Thayer would almost certainly have endorsed, given how closely he worked with his students when they were at Harvard and, in many cases, for years afterward. It is no exaggeration to say that our lives today were affected by the active law-related personal correspondence between Thayer and his men. Let's hear from Professor Porwancher about what might be called the Thayer Effect and what co-authorship with students entails. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Though relatively short, the 2022 book The Prophet of Harvard Law: James Bradley Thayer and His Legal Legacy (UP of Kansas, 2022) by Andrew Porwancher, Austin Coffey, Taylor Jipp, and Jake Mazeitis, is jam-packed with information about late 19th and early 20th Century legal history and the professionalization of American legal education. This is a moving tale of a professor whose acolytes included some of the giants of American jurisprudence (e.g., the judges and justices Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Learned Hand and the legal scholars John Henry Wigmore and Roscoe Pound). Even those not directly taught by Thayer, such as Felix Frankfurter, lauded him as an intellectual influence. You may be thinking, “Why should I take the time to read a book about a long-dead Harvard law professor?” Well, because many of the issues that James Bradley Thayer (1831-1902) and his students grappled with have shaped almost every encounter Americans have with the law and affect our rights from the workplace to the schoolroom to the courtroom. Thayer and Wigmore, for example, did pioneering work on the laws of evidence. Hand did the same on the topic of expert testimony. Holmes and Thayer thrashed out the meaning of the word “presumption” as it was used in trials. And on a grander scale, Holmes, Brandeis, and Hand were trained as thinkers on Constitutional law by Thayer. We could all do with a primer on what “living constitutionalism” is, for example. The book is also valuable for its contributions to the field of the history of education and will benefit those researching the development of professional associations and the transformation of universities like Harvard from small liberal arts institutions into major research universities. This is social history at its best. We read about how Thayer attracted bright young men from across the country who applied what they learned under their beloved mentor once they left Harvard and took up posts elsewhere (as Wigmore did as dean at Northwestern Law School) and/or played key roles in major legal cases in the Progressive Era and beyond. Economics. Labor Law. Free speech. They're all here. And “beloved” is not too strong a word for the way these titans of American law regarded Thayer. Early career academics in any field who need a role model of a dedicated teacher could do worse than study the life of James Bradley Thayer. He was the subject of admiration and gratitude decades later by influential men who credited him with providing moral support and practical help when they were first starting out and for setting a standard of learning and hard work that they applied in their judicial and academic careers. Thayer was a networker and mentor par excellence. The book is interesting in itself apart from its subject in that it is a joint work by a professor (Andrew Porwancher) and three of his former students. That is a project worthy of note and something Thayer would almost certainly have endorsed, given how closely he worked with his students when they were at Harvard and, in many cases, for years afterward. It is no exaggeration to say that our lives today were affected by the active law-related personal correspondence between Thayer and his men. Let's hear from Professor Porwancher about what might be called the Thayer Effect and what co-authorship with students entails. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Though relatively short, the 2022 book The Prophet of Harvard Law: James Bradley Thayer and His Legal Legacy (UP of Kansas, 2022) by Andrew Porwancher, Austin Coffey, Taylor Jipp, and Jake Mazeitis, is jam-packed with information about late 19th and early 20th Century legal history and the professionalization of American legal education. This is a moving tale of a professor whose acolytes included some of the giants of American jurisprudence (e.g., the judges and justices Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Learned Hand and the legal scholars John Henry Wigmore and Roscoe Pound). Even those not directly taught by Thayer, such as Felix Frankfurter, lauded him as an intellectual influence. You may be thinking, “Why should I take the time to read a book about a long-dead Harvard law professor?” Well, because many of the issues that James Bradley Thayer (1831-1902) and his students grappled with have shaped almost every encounter Americans have with the law and affect our rights from the workplace to the schoolroom to the courtroom. Thayer and Wigmore, for example, did pioneering work on the laws of evidence. Hand did the same on the topic of expert testimony. Holmes and Thayer thrashed out the meaning of the word “presumption” as it was used in trials. And on a grander scale, Holmes, Brandeis, and Hand were trained as thinkers on Constitutional law by Thayer. We could all do with a primer on what “living constitutionalism” is, for example. The book is also valuable for its contributions to the field of the history of education and will benefit those researching the development of professional associations and the transformation of universities like Harvard from small liberal arts institutions into major research universities. This is social history at its best. We read about how Thayer attracted bright young men from across the country who applied what they learned under their beloved mentor once they left Harvard and took up posts elsewhere (as Wigmore did as dean at Northwestern Law School) and/or played key roles in major legal cases in the Progressive Era and beyond. Economics. Labor Law. Free speech. They're all here. And “beloved” is not too strong a word for the way these titans of American law regarded Thayer. Early career academics in any field who need a role model of a dedicated teacher could do worse than study the life of James Bradley Thayer. He was the subject of admiration and gratitude decades later by influential men who credited him with providing moral support and practical help when they were first starting out and for setting a standard of learning and hard work that they applied in their judicial and academic careers. Thayer was a networker and mentor par excellence. The book is interesting in itself apart from its subject in that it is a joint work by a professor (Andrew Porwancher) and three of his former students. That is a project worthy of note and something Thayer would almost certainly have endorsed, given how closely he worked with his students when they were at Harvard and, in many cases, for years afterward. It is no exaggeration to say that our lives today were affected by the active law-related personal correspondence between Thayer and his men. Let's hear from Professor Porwancher about what might be called the Thayer Effect and what co-authorship with students entails. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

Though relatively short, the 2022 book The Prophet of Harvard Law: James Bradley Thayer and His Legal Legacy (UP of Kansas, 2022) by Andrew Porwancher, Austin Coffey, Taylor Jipp, and Jake Mazeitis, is jam-packed with information about late 19th and early 20th Century legal history and the professionalization of American legal education. This is a moving tale of a professor whose acolytes included some of the giants of American jurisprudence (e.g., the judges and justices Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Learned Hand and the legal scholars John Henry Wigmore and Roscoe Pound). Even those not directly taught by Thayer, such as Felix Frankfurter, lauded him as an intellectual influence. You may be thinking, “Why should I take the time to read a book about a long-dead Harvard law professor?” Well, because many of the issues that James Bradley Thayer (1831-1902) and his students grappled with have shaped almost every encounter Americans have with the law and affect our rights from the workplace to the schoolroom to the courtroom. Thayer and Wigmore, for example, did pioneering work on the laws of evidence. Hand did the same on the topic of expert testimony. Holmes and Thayer thrashed out the meaning of the word “presumption” as it was used in trials. And on a grander scale, Holmes, Brandeis, and Hand were trained as thinkers on Constitutional law by Thayer. We could all do with a primer on what “living constitutionalism” is, for example. The book is also valuable for its contributions to the field of the history of education and will benefit those researching the development of professional associations and the transformation of universities like Harvard from small liberal arts institutions into major research universities. This is social history at its best. We read about how Thayer attracted bright young men from across the country who applied what they learned under their beloved mentor once they left Harvard and took up posts elsewhere (as Wigmore did as dean at Northwestern Law School) and/or played key roles in major legal cases in the Progressive Era and beyond. Economics. Labor Law. Free speech. They're all here. And “beloved” is not too strong a word for the way these titans of American law regarded Thayer. Early career academics in any field who need a role model of a dedicated teacher could do worse than study the life of James Bradley Thayer. He was the subject of admiration and gratitude decades later by influential men who credited him with providing moral support and practical help when they were first starting out and for setting a standard of learning and hard work that they applied in their judicial and academic careers. Thayer was a networker and mentor par excellence. The book is interesting in itself apart from its subject in that it is a joint work by a professor (Andrew Porwancher) and three of his former students. That is a project worthy of note and something Thayer would almost certainly have endorsed, given how closely he worked with his students when they were at Harvard and, in many cases, for years afterward. It is no exaggeration to say that our lives today were affected by the active law-related personal correspondence between Thayer and his men. Let's hear from Professor Porwancher about what might be called the Thayer Effect and what co-authorship with students entails. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Though relatively short, the 2022 book The Prophet of Harvard Law: James Bradley Thayer and His Legal Legacy (UP of Kansas, 2022) by Andrew Porwancher, Austin Coffey, Taylor Jipp, and Jake Mazeitis, is jam-packed with information about late 19th and early 20th Century legal history and the professionalization of American legal education. This is a moving tale of a professor whose acolytes included some of the giants of American jurisprudence (e.g., the judges and justices Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Learned Hand and the legal scholars John Henry Wigmore and Roscoe Pound). Even those not directly taught by Thayer, such as Felix Frankfurter, lauded him as an intellectual influence. You may be thinking, “Why should I take the time to read a book about a long-dead Harvard law professor?” Well, because many of the issues that James Bradley Thayer (1831-1902) and his students grappled with have shaped almost every encounter Americans have with the law and affect our rights from the workplace to the schoolroom to the courtroom. Thayer and Wigmore, for example, did pioneering work on the laws of evidence. Hand did the same on the topic of expert testimony. Holmes and Thayer thrashed out the meaning of the word “presumption” as it was used in trials. And on a grander scale, Holmes, Brandeis, and Hand were trained as thinkers on Constitutional law by Thayer. We could all do with a primer on what “living constitutionalism” is, for example. The book is also valuable for its contributions to the field of the history of education and will benefit those researching the development of professional associations and the transformation of universities like Harvard from small liberal arts institutions into major research universities. This is social history at its best. We read about how Thayer attracted bright young men from across the country who applied what they learned under their beloved mentor once they left Harvard and took up posts elsewhere (as Wigmore did as dean at Northwestern Law School) and/or played key roles in major legal cases in the Progressive Era and beyond. Economics. Labor Law. Free speech. They're all here. And “beloved” is not too strong a word for the way these titans of American law regarded Thayer. Early career academics in any field who need a role model of a dedicated teacher could do worse than study the life of James Bradley Thayer. He was the subject of admiration and gratitude decades later by influential men who credited him with providing moral support and practical help when they were first starting out and for setting a standard of learning and hard work that they applied in their judicial and academic careers. Thayer was a networker and mentor par excellence. The book is interesting in itself apart from its subject in that it is a joint work by a professor (Andrew Porwancher) and three of his former students. That is a project worthy of note and something Thayer would almost certainly have endorsed, given how closely he worked with his students when they were at Harvard and, in many cases, for years afterward. It is no exaggeration to say that our lives today were affected by the active law-related personal correspondence between Thayer and his men. Let's hear from Professor Porwancher about what might be called the Thayer Effect and what co-authorship with students entails. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Though relatively short, the 2022 book The Prophet of Harvard Law: James Bradley Thayer and His Legal Legacy (UP of Kansas, 2022) by Andrew Porwancher, Austin Coffey, Taylor Jipp, and Jake Mazeitis, is jam-packed with information about late 19th and early 20th Century legal history and the professionalization of American legal education. This is a moving tale of a professor whose acolytes included some of the giants of American jurisprudence (e.g., the judges and justices Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Learned Hand and the legal scholars John Henry Wigmore and Roscoe Pound). Even those not directly taught by Thayer, such as Felix Frankfurter, lauded him as an intellectual influence. You may be thinking, “Why should I take the time to read a book about a long-dead Harvard law professor?” Well, because many of the issues that James Bradley Thayer (1831-1902) and his students grappled with have shaped almost every encounter Americans have with the law and affect our rights from the workplace to the schoolroom to the courtroom. Thayer and Wigmore, for example, did pioneering work on the laws of evidence. Hand did the same on the topic of expert testimony. Holmes and Thayer thrashed out the meaning of the word “presumption” as it was used in trials. And on a grander scale, Holmes, Brandeis, and Hand were trained as thinkers on Constitutional law by Thayer. We could all do with a primer on what “living constitutionalism” is, for example. The book is also valuable for its contributions to the field of the history of education and will benefit those researching the development of professional associations and the transformation of universities like Harvard from small liberal arts institutions into major research universities. This is social history at its best. We read about how Thayer attracted bright young men from across the country who applied what they learned under their beloved mentor once they left Harvard and took up posts elsewhere (as Wigmore did as dean at Northwestern Law School) and/or played key roles in major legal cases in the Progressive Era and beyond. Economics. Labor Law. Free speech. They're all here. And “beloved” is not too strong a word for the way these titans of American law regarded Thayer. Early career academics in any field who need a role model of a dedicated teacher could do worse than study the life of James Bradley Thayer. He was the subject of admiration and gratitude decades later by influential men who credited him with providing moral support and practical help when they were first starting out and for setting a standard of learning and hard work that they applied in their judicial and academic careers. Thayer was a networker and mentor par excellence. The book is interesting in itself apart from its subject in that it is a joint work by a professor (Andrew Porwancher) and three of his former students. That is a project worthy of note and something Thayer would almost certainly have endorsed, given how closely he worked with his students when they were at Harvard and, in many cases, for years afterward. It is no exaggeration to say that our lives today were affected by the active law-related personal correspondence between Thayer and his men. Let's hear from Professor Porwancher about what might be called the Thayer Effect and what co-authorship with students entails. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Though relatively short, the 2022 book The Prophet of Harvard Law: James Bradley Thayer and His Legal Legacy (UP of Kansas, 2022) by Andrew Porwancher, Austin Coffey, Taylor Jipp, and Jake Mazeitis, is jam-packed with information about late 19th and early 20th Century legal history and the professionalization of American legal education. This is a moving tale of a professor whose acolytes included some of the giants of American jurisprudence (e.g., the judges and justices Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, Learned Hand and the legal scholars John Henry Wigmore and Roscoe Pound). Even those not directly taught by Thayer, such as Felix Frankfurter, lauded him as an intellectual influence. You may be thinking, “Why should I take the time to read a book about a long-dead Harvard law professor?” Well, because many of the issues that James Bradley Thayer (1831-1902) and his students grappled with have shaped almost every encounter Americans have with the law and affect our rights from the workplace to the schoolroom to the courtroom. Thayer and Wigmore, for example, did pioneering work on the laws of evidence. Hand did the same on the topic of expert testimony. Holmes and Thayer thrashed out the meaning of the word “presumption” as it was used in trials. And on a grander scale, Holmes, Brandeis, and Hand were trained as thinkers on Constitutional law by Thayer. We could all do with a primer on what “living constitutionalism” is, for example. The book is also valuable for its contributions to the field of the history of education and will benefit those researching the development of professional associations and the transformation of universities like Harvard from small liberal arts institutions into major research universities. This is social history at its best. We read about how Thayer attracted bright young men from across the country who applied what they learned under their beloved mentor once they left Harvard and took up posts elsewhere (as Wigmore did as dean at Northwestern Law School) and/or played key roles in major legal cases in the Progressive Era and beyond. Economics. Labor Law. Free speech. They're all here. And “beloved” is not too strong a word for the way these titans of American law regarded Thayer. Early career academics in any field who need a role model of a dedicated teacher could do worse than study the life of James Bradley Thayer. He was the subject of admiration and gratitude decades later by influential men who credited him with providing moral support and practical help when they were first starting out and for setting a standard of learning and hard work that they applied in their judicial and academic careers. Thayer was a networker and mentor par excellence. The book is interesting in itself apart from its subject in that it is a joint work by a professor (Andrew Porwancher) and three of his former students. That is a project worthy of note and something Thayer would almost certainly have endorsed, given how closely he worked with his students when they were at Harvard and, in many cases, for years afterward. It is no exaggeration to say that our lives today were affected by the active law-related personal correspondence between Thayer and his men. Let's hear from Professor Porwancher about what might be called the Thayer Effect and what co-authorship with students entails. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In April of 1967, no sooner had the dust settled on the failed investigation into Yolande Waddington's murder when the village of Beenham would be stunned by two more killings, when nine year olds Jeanette Wigmore and Jacqueline Williams were found dead in a disused gravel pit. This time though, one suspect would stand out from the rest and for this crime at least, someone would be charged with murder. Patreon www.patreon.com/theoutlinespodcast iTunes itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-o…ast/id1325180386 Website www.theoutlinespodcast.com Twitter @outlinespodcast Instagram @theoutlinespodcast

This time around, we're joined once again by Rem Wigmore (@faewriter), who brings us a delicious excerpt from their trunked novella, Considine's Counsel, which leads us into a great conversation about the study of story forms, actual play podcasts, and an opportunity, as if we needed one, to just be 110% on our bullshit.   Things we mention in this episode:   Foxhunt and Wolfpack, by Rem Wigmore Lake Taupō The Lord of the Rings, by J.R.R. Tolkien The Hobbit, by J.R.R. Tolkien Friends at the Table The Tiffany problem Dungeons & Dragons Miri's episode The Witcher (TV Series) Newgrange Passage tombs CoNZealand Codex writers group  C.L. Polk Neon Hemlock Kai Ashante Wilson's novellas F&SF “Time Bomb Time,” by C.C. Finlay Villanelle (poetry) And What Can We Offer You Tonight By Premee Mohamed Premee's book tour episode Tor.com publishing River of Teeth, Taste of Marrow, and Upright Women Wanted, by Sarah Gailey The Tensorate series, by Neon Yang Emily Tesh The Murderbot Diaries, by Martha Wells The Blacktongue Thief, by Christopher Buehlman K.J. Charles' Will Darling Adventures Kurangaituku, by Whiti Hereaka Eat the Rich, by Sarah Gailey Squad, by Maggie Tokuda-Hall The Girl and the Sea, by Molly Knox Ostertag The Witch Boy, by Molly Knox Ostertag Brennan Lee Mulligan Escape from the Blood Keep Critical Role Matt Mercer Ify Nwadiwe Exandria Unlimited Erika Ishii Last Shooting  Doctor Who Queen of Swords Press Rem's previous episode Rem's website   Stick around next month, when my guests will be Neon Yang and Aimee Kuzenski!

On playing piano with Black Sabbath in attendance, his friendship with the late comedian Sean Lock, and the experience of winning Strictly Come Dancing. For this episode, actor, comedian, musician, and singer Bill Bailey goes out to lunch with Jay. Bill and Jay enjoy a delicious meal courtesy of The Wigmore, London: https://the-wigmore.co.uk/  Official show merch: https://kontraband.shop/collections/out-to-lunch Out To Lunch is a Somethin' Else and Jay Rayner Production with Sony Music Entertainment.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

James Wigmore has worked as a forensic toxicologist for over 29 years at the Centre of Forensic Sciences in Toronto, Ontario.  He has testified in over 700 criminal cases throughout Canada and in numerous personal injury civil cases and coroner's inquests.  He has published over 70 scientific articles in forensic toxicology which have been cited by the Supreme Court of Canada, and the High Court of South Africa.  He has written numerous book chapters as well as 3 books on the medicolegal aspects of alcohol and cannabis.  His next book will be on nicotine and vaping. Join us as we discuss the holy trinity of toxicology... Cannabis, Opioids and Nicotine.Originally aired on February 3, 2022

Organizations Close to Jennifer's HeartGot Your Back CanadaNational Society of Intimacy Professionals (NSIP) Association of Acting Coaches and Educators (AACE) Jennifer Wigmore Official Website

Wayne Goodman in conversation with Rem Wigmore, novelist, fantasist, and teller of tall tales

In this episode, I had the honor of chatting with creative artist Jennifer Wigmore. She was most recently seen in the movie "The Winter Palace" with Danica McKellar and Neal Bledsoe which premiered on GAC Family in January 2022. However, as we chatted and some amazing audience members jumped in as well, we had a blast discussing her many-faceted career, including many other notable works or hers: Designated Survivor, Little Men, and Malory Towers.FOLLOW JENNIFERWebsite: https://jenniferwigmore.com/Twitter: https://twitter.com/JenniferWigmoreFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/jenniferwigmore/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/jenniferwigmoreart/IMDb: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0927865/

In this episode I interviewed Lauren Wigmore who is a healer and intuitive, specialising in working with individuals who feel stuck and hopeless, helping them to transition from a place of pain and heaviness by shedding the weight of outdated emotional states, self-sabotage, fear and anxiety to feel free, at peace and realigned to their authentic self. Lauren takes a triad approach to healing that focuses on the mind, body and spirit and uses a unique and bespoke feel-heal-reveal model that integrates a mix of modalities, taking her clients from chaos to calm. In this episode we explore; - How Lauren has overcome a number of personal obstacles, including depression, addiction and low self-worth when nothing else worked. - The impact of feeling like a 'black sheep' & how to feel empowered as 'different' rather than feeling inferior or not good enouogh. - Navigating family relationships when it comes to stepping into your most empowered & authentic self.  - How to manage other peoples projections on to you. - The power of integrating Reiki, Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT), energy medicine, CBT, NLP & coaching to support individuals through their own journeys of self-discovery and healing.  Connect with Lauren; Lauren is available to work with 1:1 and is offering a discount for all Your Next Chapter listeners with 20% off for all 1:1 30 or 90 day Journey sign ups in December 2021, start dates can vary. More details can be found on her website.  @Transitionwithlauren (IG) Transition with Lauren (FB page)  E: hello@laurenwigmore.co.uk W: www.laurenwigmore.co.uk Connect with Becky;  BLACK FRIDAY OFFER - Authentic Woman Rising Self-led Signature Programme: Authentic Woman Rising (yournextchapter.co.uk) Instagram: @thisisbeckyrodrigues Website: www.yournextchapter.co.uk Facebook Group: The Ever Evolving Leaders - Community for self-leading women (facebook.com) Facebook Profile: (20+) Becky Rodrigues | Facebook  

This short podcast is on the front of my website, and when you listen to it, you'll probably get to know more about people who I work with. Book a no obligation chat My website

Rem Wigmore joins us to share their solarpunk, hopepunk, future fantasy-scifi novel Foxhunt! We delve into a discussion of subgenres that have come from climate change fiction and satisfying romantic arcs.

Early Monday morning, Seven West Media announced that it had entered into a conditional agreement to acquire Prime Media Group, in a deal worth $131.9 million and includes businesses and related assets of Prime. (02:58) Australia again delivered double-digit revenue growth according to the latest SMI figures, with ad spend for September up 15.5% on 2020 numbers. Q3 booking figures were also up 4.6% on 2019 levels. (12:54) Sky News Australia and Alan Jones are set to part ways, with Jones' last show to air tonight. (21:23) Finally, an interview with Omnicom Media Group's CEO Peter Horgan and Foundation's general manager, Liz Wigmore. (24:14)

In this episode Alan and Diane talk to author Rem Wigmore. They discuss what the use of pronouns, WorldCon 2020 from a New Zealander's perspective, horror novels, and Rem's new novel Foxhunt. We also have our Spec Fic Partisan's audio column by Rick Claypool. This time Rick has a discussion of fake horrors in a time of so many true and actual horrors.

This time around, to open out our unintentional Oceana month, I'm joined by the delightful Rem Wigmore (@faewriter), whose novel, Foxhunt, is available now, wherever you get your books, from Queen of Swords Press. They read us a slightly-spoiler-y excerpt of the book (you can skip ahead 11:40 from the start of the reading if you'd rather not be spoiled) that leads us into some great conversation about banter, taking the piss, and how mythology might survive into the future.   Things we mention in this episode: Hades (game) Orpheus and Eurydice  The Realm of the Elderlings series, by Robin Hobb These Violent Delights, by Chloe Gong Butcherbird, by Cassie Hart Riverwitch, by Rem Wigmore The Contemporary Witchy Fiction project The Waikato River  Rem's website    Join us again on the 15th of October, when my guest will be Freya Marske!

Canadian pianist Élisabeth Pion, Guildhall Wigmore Recital Prize winner for 2020, joins us to talk about her Wigmore Hall recital. We discuss her programme of much-loved works by Mozart, Beethoven and three French composers from across the ages, her interest in Lili Boulanger, and getting back to performing in front of a live audience. Following the postponement of this Winner's recital in Summer 2020, we're delighted that Élisabeth is now able to present this programme with a live audience in the wonderful surroundings of Wigmore Hall. The recital takes place on Monday 19 July at 7.30pm. Tickets are available from the Wigmore Hall Box Office (https://wigmore-hall.org.uk/whats-on/elisabeth-pion-202107191930). Follow us on Twitter (www.twitter.com/guildhallschool), Facebook (www.facebook.com/guildhallschool/) and Instagram (www.instagram.com/guildhallschool) and head to our website (www.gsmd.ac.uk) to stay up to date with all the events and news from the Guildhall School. Intro and outro music is Little Lily Swing by Tri-Tachyon, licenced under Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 (https://freemusicarchive.org/music/Tri-Tachyon/Little_Lily_Swing/Tri-Tachyon_-_01_-_Little_Lily_Swing)

In this episode, Jim Garrity offers practical tips for developing deposition testimony that will allow you to use leading questions when examining adverse witnesses you'll call during your case-in-chief at trial. Being able to lead so-called "611(c)(2) witnesses" before the jury is a tremendous advantage, but you've got to first build the foundation. Garrity explains the requirements of Fed. R.Evid. 611(c)(2), and offers numerous lines of deposition inquiries to meet your burden.SHOW NOTESMcleod v. Llano, No. 17CV6062ARRRLM, 2021 WL 1669732, at *8 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 28, 2021) Here, Officer Prinston is defendant's partner, witnessed the use of force at issue, and previously was a defendant in this case. Pl.'s Mot. 7. Additionally, plaintiff has shown that Officer Prinston provided inconsistent testimony in the CCRB investigation and the NYPD administrative trial that favored defendant. Id. at 9. These facts sufficiently show that Officer Prinston is a “witness identified with an adverse party")Doe By Watson v. Russell Cty. Sch. Bd., No. 1:16CV00045, 2018 WL 1089277 (W.D. Va. Feb. 28, 2018) (“The normal sense of a person ‘identified with an adverse party' has come to mean, in general, an employee, agent, friend, or relative of an adverse party.” Id. (citation omitted); see Ratliff v. City of Chi., No. 10 C 739, 2012 WL 7993412 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 20, 2012). “Whether a former employee is properly considered ‘a witness identified with an adverse party' is an unsettled inquiry whose resolution is often fact-dependent.” Fehr, 2015 WL 6166627. In analyzing this question, courts have come to differing conclusions based upon the former employee's position and involvement, if any, in the events giving rise to the litigation. Compare Stahl v. Sun Microsystems, Inc., 775 F. Supp. 1397, 1398 (D. Colo. 1991) (finding former employee of defendant to be “identified with an adverse party” because of her former employment and ongoing relationship with a key witnesses who attended the trial on behalf of defendant), with Radice v. Meritor Sav. Bank, Inc., Civ. A. No. 89-6914, 1993 WL 56044 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 2, 1993) (finding that witness, who was a former employee and defendant in the case, was not a hostile witness simply due to his former employment because he had been dismissed as a defendant at summary judgment and “was not involved in the internal process” that led to litigation).Flores v. Miami-Dade Cty., 787 So. 2d 955, 958 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001) (A doctor's sharing of a runner with plaintiff's prior counsel, his extensive payments to the runner, and his reciprocal referral arrangement are facts which could reasonably be viewed as creating a bias toward testifying favorably to plaintiffs. Interest and motive of a witness are proper subjects for cross-examination. Id. § 608.5, at 465. The cross-examination was properly allowed)Harris v. Buxton T.V., Inc., 460 So. 2d 828, 833 (Miss. 1984) (“In sum, the test for determining how closely the witness must be identified with the adverse party before he falls within that rule is variously stated: (1) If the witness' acts or omissions are the predicate for a party's claim or defense, that is, if in a case such as this under the plaintiff's theory of the case the defendant is subject to potential liability in substantial part not just because of his own actions but because of the actions or omissions of the witness in question, then that witness is ordinarily sufficiently identified with an adverse party and may be called as an adverse witness and interrogated by leading questions. (2) If the conduct of the witness plays such an integral part in the transaction or occurrence which is the subject of the action and which gives rise to the defendant's potential liability, so that the defendant, if the plaintiff's primary original claim is successful, would have prima facie a claim for indemnity over against the witness, then again the witness is said to be sufficiently identified with the adverse party so that the witness may be called as an adverse witness and cross-examined”) *** Since the adoption of Rule 611, Fed.R.Ev. in 1975, there has been precious little litigation concerning the issue of who may be considered as “identified with an adverse party”. There are only two decisions emanating from United States Courts of Appeals which address this issue: Ellis v. City of Chicago, 667 F.2d 606 (7th Cir.1981) and Perkins v. Volkswagen of America, Inc., 596 F.2d 681 (5th Cir.1979). The holding of these cases can be summarized as follows: Before the adoption of Rule 611(c), the use of leading questions on direct examination required either a showing of actual hostility or a determination that the witness being examined was an adverse party, or an officer, director, or managing *832 agent of such an adverse party. [citations omitted] These limitations were designed to guard against the risk of improper suggestion inherent in examining friendly witnesses through the use of leading questions. [citations omitted] The drafters of Rule 611(c), however, determined that these limitations represented “an unduly narrow concept of those who may safely be regarded as hostile without further demonstration.” [citation omitted] The new rule was thus designed to enlarge the categories of witnesses automatically regarded as adverse, and therefore subject to interrogation by leading questions without further showing of actual hostility. —Ellis, 667 F.2d at 612–13; see also Perkins, 596 F.2d at 682 (trial court's failure to allow a mere employee of a corporation to be regarded as “identified with the corporation” was incorrect)United States v. McLaughlin, No. CRIM.A. 95-CR-113, 1998 WL 966014, at *1 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 19, 1998) (“Here, Mr. St. Clair clearly is “identified with an adverse party”—the defendant. See Perkins v. Volkswagen of Am., 596 F.2d 681, 682 (5th Cir.1979) (employee of an adverse party was “identified” with employer). Although I would not call them in cahoots, they were, at the very least, cohorts”)Washington v. Illinois Dep't of Revenue, No. 01-3300, 2006 WL 2873437, at *1 (C.D. Ill. Oct. 5, 2006) “The normal sense of a person ‘identified with an adverse party' has come to mean, in general, an employee, agent, friend, or relative of an adverse party.” Vanemmerik v. The Ground Round, Inc., 1998 WL 474106, *1 (E.D.Pa.1998) (collecting cases). As one district court has recognized, “Scholars have warned that, although the rule allows ample room to maneuver, “the courts should be careful before extending this list much further.” Id. (citing 28 WRIGHT & MILLER, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE § 6168, *6 (1993)). Even if a witness is not an adverse party, or identified with an adverse party, the Court may find the witness to be “hostile” under Rule 611(c). “This classification usually involves a showing by the examining party that the witness is biased against the direct examiner, his/her client or both and often is demonstrated by examples of that witnesses demeanor.” Id. at *2 (citing 28 WRIGHT & MILLER, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE § 6168, *7 (1993)).State v. McBeth, 2019 Ohio 59 A witness identified with an adverse party is “a witness aligned with an opposing party because of a relationship or common interest in the litigation.”1 State v. Fields, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 88916, 2007-Ohio-5060, ¶ 14. “[E]vasiveness is not a prerequisite to finding adversity” in determining whether a witness is identified with an adverse party under Evid.R. 611(C). State v. McKelton, 148 Ohio St.3d 261, 2016-Ohio-5735, 70 N.E.3d 508, ¶ 150. The trial court need not expressly find that a witness is identified with an adverse party in order for the decision to allow leading questions to be affirmed on appeal. State v. Benson, 11th Dist. Portage No. 2001-P-0086, 2002-Ohio-6942, ¶ 25, citing State v. Snyder, 12th Dist. Butler No. 88-04-054, 1989 WL 943, *6 (Jan. 9, 1989). “A witness that identifies himself with an opposing party by prior acts or expressed intentions may be questioned as if on cross-examination by the party calling the witness.” State v. Shepherd, 10th Dist. Franklin No. , 2000 WL 192360, *8 (Sept. 28, 1999), quoting State v. Matthews, 5th Dist. Clark App. No. 96-CA-0011, 1997 WL 593821, *10 (Sept. 26, 1997). “Ordinarily, a trial judge is in a better position to evaluate the attitudes displayed by witnesses.” State v. Stearns, 7 Ohio App.3d 11, 14, 454 N.E.2d 139 (8th Dist.).Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Goldstone, 317 F.R.D. 147, 164 (D.N.M. 2016) The definition of a witness “identified with an adverse party” is broader than the old definition of an “adverse party” in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: Rule 43(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure has included only “an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private corporation or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party.” This limitation virtually to persons whose statements would stand as admissions is believed to be an unduly narrow concept of those who may safely be regarded as hostile without further demonstration.... The phrase of the rule, “witness identified with” an adverse party, is designed to enlarge the category of persons thus callable. 15 Fed. R. Evid. 611, advisory committee notes. Although the precise meaning of a witness identified with an adverse party is not clearly defined, a few relationships fall within its meaning. These relationships include: (i) employee/employer relationships, see Chonich v. Wayne Cty. Cmty. Coll., 874 F.2d 359, 368 (6th Cir.1989)(allowing leading questions on direct examinations of community college's former president and personnel director); Haney v. Mizell Mem'l Hosp., 744 F.2d 1467, 1478 (11th Cir.1984)(“Nurse Williamson, an employee of one of the defendants present when the alleged malpractice may have occurred, certainly was identified with a party adverse to [the plaintiff].”); (ii) romantic partners, see United States v. Hicks, 748 F.2d 854, 859 (4th Cir.1984)(“Clearly [the defendant's girlfriend] was a person ‘identified with an adverse party' so that interrogation by leading questions was permissible.”); and (iii) law enforcement investigators, see United States v. Tsui, 646 F.2d 365, 368 (9th Cir.1981)(stating that a district court's refusal to permit the defendant to pose leading questions to an IRS investigator was error, albeit harmless error). Courts must be careful, however, not to expand these pre-existing categories. See Suarez Matos v. Ashford Presbyterian Cmty. Hosp., Inc., 4 F.3d 47, 50 (1st Cir.1993)(“We find no case involving the adversary's proposed expert, or suggesting that simply because a party expects favorable testimony from a witness, the opponent is entitled to call him, or her, as hostile.”). They may thus wait until trial to determine whether the witness will actually demonstrate hostility. See Gold, supra, at § 6168 (“[S]ince leading questions can also be justified if the specific witness in question is demonstrably ‘hostile,' there is no need to make possibly unwarranted generalizations about the types of witnesses who should be presumed immune to suggestion.”); United States v. Brown, 603 F.2d 1022, 1025–26 (1st Cir.1979)(treating a witness as hostile “after a lengthy direct examination (twenty-five transcript pages) during which all leading questions were excluded”). Courts make determinations outside of existing formal categories based in large part on a witness' demeanor at trial. See United States v. Cisneros–Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 762 (5th Cir.2008)(affirming a district court's decision to treat a witness as hostile “given the extent of Edgardo's memory problems, which reasonably appears to have been feigned, and Edgardo's hostility”); United States v. Wiley, 846 F.2d 150, 156 (2d Cir.1988)(treating witness as hostile where he “was unresponsive and deviated from previous statements”). Even witnesses cooperating with the prosecution pursuant to an immunity agreement may nonetheless be designated hostile witnesses to the United States during their direct examinations. See United States v. Diaz, 662 F.2d 713, 718 (11th Cir.1981)(“The record clearly reflects, however, that, despite the grant of immunity, Gelebert's hostility was directed to the government, rather than to Diaz. Previously, Gelebert had testified that he was a very good friend of Diaz and that he had known him for approximately five years[.]”)Fehr v. SUS-Q Cyber Charter Sch., No. 4:13-CV-01871, 2015 WL 6166627, at *3 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 20, 2015) citing, N.L.R.B. v. Sw. Colorado Contractors Ass'n, 379 F.2d 360, 365 (10th Cir.1967) (finding leading questions appropriate under similar statutory provision because “[b]y virtue of [former employee's] status as the proprietor of one of the respondent firms as well as his former official position within [the Defendant] Association, his interests and sympathies were clearly aligned with those of the other respondent”)Dudley v. City of Kinston, No. 4:18-CV-00072-D, 2020 WL 7049554, at *5 (E.D.N.C. Dec. 1, 2020) That Moore is Dudley's daughter places her firmly within the category of a witness identified with an adverse party. Vanemmerik v. The Ground Round, Inc., No. 97–5923, 1998 WL 474106 (E.D. Pa. July 16, 1998) (“The normal sense of a person ‘identified with an adverse party' has come to mean, in general, an employee, agent, friend, or relative of an adverse party.”). There was nothing inappropriate about defense counsel asking Moore leading questions)Chonich v. Wayne Cty. Cmty. Coll., 874 F.2d 359, 368 (6th Cir. 1989) (allowing leading questions on direct examinations of community college's former president and personnel director)Stahl v. Sun Microsystems, Inc., 775 F. Supp. 1397, 1398 (D. Colo. 1991) (finding former employee of defendant to be "identified with an adverse party" in part because of her former employment)Haney v. Mizell Mem'l Hosp., 744 F.2d 1467, 1478 (11th Cir. 1984) (finding that an employee of defendant present when the alleged malpractice may have occurred was identified with an adverse party). The term 'witness identified with an adverse party' is intended to apply broadly to an identification based upon employment by the party or by virtue of a demonstrated connection to an opposing party)Batte v. Pomeroy, 497 So.2d 1275 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Medina; Smith v. Fortune Insurance Co., 404 So.2d 821 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)Young v. Metropolitan Dade County, 201 So.2d 594 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)Colwell v. Voyager Casualty Ins Co., 251 Ga. 744, 747 (S. Ct. Ga. 1983) (adverse party may only question witness by direct examination)Ellis v. City of Chicago, 667 F.2d 606, 612 (7th Cir.1981)Perkins v. Volkswagen of America, Inc., 596 F.2d 681,682 (5th Cir.1979) (error for trial court to rule that employee of defendant would be plaintiff's witness if plaintiff called him)Erp v. Carroll, 438 So. 2d 31, 36–37 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983) An adverse witness means only one who gives evidence on a material matter that is adverse, unfavorable or prejudicial to the party calling the witness. See *37 Hernandez v. State, 156 Fla. 356, 22 So.2d 781 (Fla.1945); Johnson v. State, 178 So.2d 724, 728 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965). Cf., Direct Transport Company of Florida v. Rakaskas, 167 So.2d 623 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964), cert. dismd., 176 So.2d 68 (Fla.1965). A knowledgeable but unwilling, reluctant or recalcitrant witness should always be subject to interrogation by leading questions without regard to who called the witness or as to the witness' status as a party or identity with an adverse party or the possible interest the witness may have in the outcome of the case. Conversely, an obviously willing, forthright and candid witness need not, and should not, be led without regard to the witness' formal status or interest or whether the witness is being directly examined by the person calling the witness or cross-examined by anyone else. Thus, as Wigmore concludes, the test for permitting or prohibiting leading questions is ultimately and essentially independent of the superficial circumstance as to which party originally put the witness on the stand. 3A Wigmore, Evidence § 909 (Chadbourne Rev.1970)Colwell v. Voyager Casualty Ins Co., 251 Ga. 744, 747 (S. Ct. Ga. 1983) (party may not use leading questions on cross-examination of friendly witness after adverse party called the hostile witness on “direct” examination")

John Gilhooly is the inspirational force behind one of the great recital venues in the world, Wigmore Hall in London. In this interview he not only speaks to the current challenges they are facing there, but also offers a fascinating insight to his personal philosophy of audience engagement. Head over to Apple podcasts, Spotify and Google to hear all about it!

Today's episode features a truly THRILLING neo-gothic horror story complete with misty mountains, a glassy sea, a double crossing queen and her murderous companion. Mandee covers Schubert's Der Zwerg (text by Mattäus von Collin). Guest vocalist is the inimitable mezzo-soprano Ema Nikolovska.   Sources: "Of Dwarves, Perversion, and Patriotism: Schubert's Der Zwerg"  https://www.jstor.org/stable/746897?seq=1 Johnson, G., & Wigmore, R. (2014). Franz Schubert: the complete songs. New Haven ; London: Yale University Press. 

The Coronavirus has made countless people stressed, depleted, and anxious about their health and wellbeing, their survival, and the safety of friends and family, in Hong Kong and around the world. Today I talk with George Wigmore from Hong Kong Baptist University about several topics concerning the power of Music, Meditation, and Mindset to bolster your immune system, own your power to heal, and embrace your music within. Specifically, we explore how this can put you in an improved state of wellbeing and vitality in relation to the current outbreak of the coronavirus and keep your mind and body rightly focused. Some of the topics we cover are: Tips to deal with stress and anxiety How to do a powerful 3-Breath Meditation How music-meditation can help you in these areas George holds the position of English Editor in the Communications and PR Office of HKBU and formerly was the Senior Communications Officer (School of Health Sciences) at City, University of London in the UK. Love to hear your questions and comments! Contact: ben@benkoen.com #Hong Kong, #Coronavirus, #Music, #Meditation, #Wellbeing