Challenging The Validity Of Fingerprint Evidence

Challenging The Validity Of Fingerprint Evidence The reliability of fingerprint evidence as a means of identification for purpose of court continues to be generally accepted by academia and the criminal justice system. However, despite a long tradition of forensic identification to individualize prints there have been some recent challenges as to the scientific basis for fingerprint evidence. These challenges stem from valid concerns about the potential for human errors in fingerprint matching. A major factor in trying to establish the validity of fingerprint evidence is the theoretical framework as to the physical aspects of forensic science. The psychological aspect of forensic science (the preparation of physical evidence for purpose of court) is also a potential Achilles heel as to the validity of fingerprint evidence in particular in countries with an adversarial legal system where the function of counsel is largely to undermine the credibility of the evidence presented. Key words: prints, marks, reliability, validity, probability, error, bias Introduction A [finger]print is a record taken by police of a (usually) known individual under controlled conditions. A mark is an impression found at a crime scene. The role of fingerprint examiners (dactyloscopists) is to analyse marks (individualize marks) to determine whether it/they match the print/s of a known individual. Fingerprints are routinely used by police in order to identify suspects and victims of crime (e.g. homicide) and fingerprint evidence remain one of the most trusted forms of forensic evidence used in a court of law. Despite this, the various techniques used by fingerprint examiners have neither been scientifically tested nor published in scientific peer reviewed journals. The reliability of dactyloscopy techniques as a means of identification (individualization) is based on a theoretical framework as to the physical aspects of forensic science, including: persistence, uniqueness and transferability of prints and marks for purpose of identification. Until recently there had been no scientific studies conducted to validate fingerprints as physical evidence of identification. Despite this significant gap in the science of fingerprint evidence, the evidential value of fingerprint identification remains unquestioned. The reliability of dactyloscopy techniques as a means of identification continues to be generally accepted by academia and the criminal justice system. However, the use of fingerprint identification as evidence at court inevitably leads to interactions between science and the law where basic assumptions are frequently challenged. There are two different kinds of issues which may arise when presenting fingerprints as evidence at court: (i) the lack of scientific rigour in the techniques used, and; (ii) the influence of cognitive biases on expert evidence. The evidential value of fingerprint identification Fingerprint identification as its used in the criminal justice system is typically done by comparing and attempting to match a mark (latent fingerprint) found at a crime scene with a print taken from a known suspect. The various techniques used by fingerprint examiners in matching two prints are different from e.g. biometric fingerprint checks introduced by the UK Border Agency (UKBA) in 2009 as a means of identification to improve on airport security. The lack of scientific rigour in the techniques used Whilst the evidential value of fingerprint identification remains unquestioned, even by its critics, it is often assumed that its the theoretical framework as to the physical aspects of fingerprint evidence, such as the uniqueness and transferability of fingerprints, which make fingerprint identification well suited as forensic evidence for purpose of court. However, these theoretical underpinnings are often not backed up by scientific evidence and the validity of the theoretical framework of forensic science is therefore a potential Achilles heel in fingerprint evidence. The influence of cognitive biases on expert evidence Whilst the different techniques and methods used by fingerprint examiners vary from those used in automated biometric fingerprint checks, the theoretical underpinnings of fingerprint identification are the same as for biometric fingerprint checks (such as uniqueness and transferability). The results from automated biometric fingerprint checks would not however be suitable as forensic evidence at court. The main reason is that apart from the physical aspects of fingerprints, the evidential value of fingerprints is primarily based upon the expert opinions of fingerprint examiners and governed by the rules on circumstantial evidence. Highlighting the lack of objectivity in the analysis and matching of fingerprints, Stoney (1991:198) notes: In fingerprint work we become subjectively convinced of identity; we do not prove it. And this works just fine. For fingerprints. The evidential value and admissibility of fingerprint expert evidence The Law Commissions report on admissibility of evidence 2008 and 2011: The opinion evidence of an expert witness is admissible only if the court is satisfied that it is sufficiently reliable to be admitted. The opinion evidence of an expert witness is sufficiently reliable to be admitted if: the evidence is predicated on sound principles, techniques and assumptions; those principles, techniques and assumptions have been properly applied to the facts of the case; and the evidence is supported by those principles, techniques and assumptions as applied to the facts of the case. It is for the party wishing to rely on the opinion evidence of an expert witness to show that it is sufficiently reliable to be admitted. This means that guilt cannot be determined by expert evidence alone and that trust in the validity of fingerprint evidence requires a leap of faith. (Broeder, 2006, p. 154) Challenging the Validity of Fingerprint Evidence The validity of fingerprint evidence is dependent upon: the credibility of expert witnesses; validity of the theoretical framework of forensic science, and; the accuracy of procedures and techniques used. Despite its lack of scientific evidence, the theoretical underpinnings of fingerprints and reliability of methods used are rarely challenged at court. When the theoretical underpinnings of fingerprints are challenged at court, it also tends to undermine the reliability of methods used in a range of forensic evidence. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the US Supreme Court ruled that forensic evidence has to be both relevant and reliable in order to be valid. However, there are no reliability studies for fingerprint evidence and fingerprint evidence should therefore be ruled inadmissible in a US court of law. Pierce (2011) notes that the core issue in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. was the validity of deductive reasoning to reach a conclusion. (Pierce, 2011) The validity of fingerprint evidence in effect comes down to an issue of trust and credibility both of which can be undermined. The Daubert case raised the need for a model by which statistically quantifiable measures can be generated to objectively assess the reliability of fingerprint evidence. One method considered reliable by US courts is the ACE-V (analysis-comparison-evaluation-verification) method. (Haber Haber, 2008) Despite the promise of such models, Broeder (2007) argues that: No expert or expert system can provide incontrovertible categorical evidence i.e. absolute proof that a certain trace originates from a particular source. There is no objective or subjective, scientific or alternative method that will enable us to do this. Stoney (1991:198) argues that trying to prove uniqueness by use of statistical models is a ridiculous notion. (Stoney, 1991) Basis for Challenging Fingerprint Evidence Despite significant issues in terms of the validity of both theoretical underpinnings of forensic science and various techniques used, the main reason why fingerprint evidence will continue to be challenged as valid forensic science evidence is that fingerprint matching (recognition, analysis, comparison, and interpretation / evaluation) is ultimately a subjective decision-making process where results and expert evidence can be influenced by contextual and confirmation biases (human error) resulting in false identification. Whilst Stoney (1991) appears to argue that its the subjective nature of fingerprint evidence which give the individualization process credibility, Dror et. al. (2005:800) also note that fingerprint identification involves a decision making process (Dror, et al., 2005) which may ultimately result in human error and in false identification. It is therefore unfortunate that much of the debate is currently focused on attempts to improve on the reliability of fingerprint evidence through advancements in technological innovation. Attempts at improving the physical aspects of scientific evidence indicate that some problems with forensic evidence might one day be overcome by future advances in technological innovation. Whilst technical and scientific evidence are becoming increasingly important for the criminal justice system, Broeder (2006:148) suggests that its difficult for judges and juries to assess the validity of expert forensic evidence. (Broeder, 2006, p. 148) Mnookin (2008:343) argues that the courts have been seduced by superficial arguments as to the reliability of scientific methods. (Mnookin, 2008, p. 343) Considering that fingerprint evidence is ultimately a decision-making process its difficult to see how fingerprint matching could be replaced by advances in technology such as future generations of automatic fingerprint recognition systems (e.g. the ACE-V process/methodology). More effort should perhaps be focused on the social science aspect of expert forensic evidence (in particular psychology) to reduce potential cognitive biases and human error in fingerprint evidence the main basis for challenging fingerprint evidence. Cognitive Biases in Fingerprint Evidence Fingerprint evidence is supported by a general theoretical framework as to the physical principles of forensic evidence. However, fingerprint evidence is ultimately based on a series of decisions formulated by fingerprint examiners through cognitive processes. Whilst Stoney (1991) might argue that becoming subjectively convinced of identity works just fine for purpose of fingerprint matching, as it turns out, fingerprint examiners are highly susceptible to various forms of cognitive biases. Giannelli (2010) describes four different kinds of cognitive biases which may influence decision-making in forensic examination of evidence. Giannelli describes contextual bias as occurring when extraneous information influences a decision, typically in cases of ambiguity. Techniques used to avoid the influence of contextual bias when testing a new drug, include randomized (double blind) clinical trials. A similar process as part of the fingerprint verification process has been proposed by Haber and Haber (2003). (Haber Haber, 2003) Giannelli describes confirmation bias in terms of the tendency to test a hypothesis by looking for instances that confirm it rather than by searching for potentially falsifying instances. Kassin, Dror Kukucka (2013) describe the various contextual influences which may generate bias in forensic evidence, in terms of: Knowing the nature and details of the crime, being pressured by detectives; working within and as part of the police; the use of computer-generated lists that feature some suspects ahead of others; appearing in court within an adversarial criminal justice system. Experiments in cognitive biases The importance of cognitive psychology of expert evidence has been highlighted in a series of experiments conducted by Dr. Itiel Dror (2005) in which he had took the fingerprints from real criminal cases and presented them to the same fingerprint examiners who had previously given evidence at court. By changing the context for the analysis, such as strongly suggesting that a mark had previously been incorrectly matched to a print (or that a mark belonged to a particular suspect when in fact it did not), the examiners came to different conclusions, contradicting their own evidence given at court. Dr. Drors experiments showed the influence that contextual and confirmation biases can have on the outcome of fingerprint analysis. The research found that fingerprint examiners were more likely to make a match judgment on ambiguous fingerprints when exposed to emotional background stories of crimes and explicitly disturbing photographs from crime scenes, as well as subliminal messages. The researchers concluded that examiners were more likely to confirm a match in ambiguous fingerprints when exposed to contextual biases highlighting the importance of cognitive psychology in fingerprint evidence. To further highlight the importance of cognitive psychology in fingerprint evidence, an international panel of fingerprint experts convened to examine errors committed by the FBI which led to the identification of Brandon Mayfield note that the pressure of working on a high-profile terrorism case created an atmosphere which contributed to the misidentification. (US Department of Justice, 2006, p. 177) Error Rates and Probability Error Rates Experiments similar to those conducted by Dr. Dror (2005) have also been conducted by e.g. Ulery et. al. (2012) and Evett and Williams (1995). (Evett Williams, 1995) All such studies find varying degrees of inconsistency. Ulery et. al. found that when the same fingerprint evidence is given to the same examiners, they reach different conclusions approximately 10% of the time. (Kassin, et al., 2013) Ulery et. al. (2012:9) attributed such errors to a lack of quantitative criteria and limited qualitative criteria for decision. (Ulery, et al., 2012, p. 9) Such error rates are only known as a result of research conducted where examiners were themselves the subject of research experiments. Mnookin (2008b) (Mnookin, 2008) as well as (Haber Haber, 2003) and other researchers point to the lack of transparency of crime laboratories in disclosing the results double-blind tests where e.g. one examiner discover an error made by another examiner and that no data exist on the error rate correction resulting from the verification process. Jasanoff (2006) notes the right of US citizens to receive information, including scientific and technical information, in order to effectuate the goal of informed participation. (Jasanoff, 2006) However, considering the increasingly commercial nature of forensic laboratories, such error rate data is unlikely to be volunteered any time soon. Probability Aitken Taroni (2004:126) note that evaluation of fingerprint evidence is based on a statistical model of probabilistic inference. (Aitken Taroni, 2004) Probability may be defined as [a] statistical means of describing uncertainty. (Brenner, 1997, p. 126) Galton (1892:100) raised the problem of estimating the probability of two prints (alike in their minutiae) as having been made by two different persons and attempted to give an approximate numerical idea of the value of finger prints as a means of Personal Identification. Galton (1892:110) calculated the probability of two different individuals having the same fingerprints (Type I error) to be less than 1 to 224 x 24 x 28 or about 1 in 64 billion. Neumann (2012:21) explains the difficulty of probability as faced by fingerprint examiners giving evidence at court: If it is his belief that the mark probably does or almost certainly does or is rather unlikely to match, he is forbidden to say so in court; in those cases, fingerprint evidence, for or against the accused, simply does not appear in the case. (Neumann, 2012) So, how common is it that examiners giving evidence at court arent necessarily 100% certain of the evidence they give at court? According to research by Neuman et.al. it happens in 30% of the all comparisons performed. (Neumann, et al., 2011) Galton notes the effect on probability when matching two or more marks to the prints of a known individual: When two fingers of each of the two persons are compared, and found to have the same minutiae, the improbability of 1 to 236 becomes squared, and reaches a figure altogether beyond the range of the imagination; when three fingers, it is cubed, and so on. [W]hen two, three, or more fingers in the two persons agree to that extent, the strength of the evidence rises by squares, cubes, etc., far above the level of that amount of probability which begins to rank as certainty. Galton (1892:111-112) Case Studies Broeder (2006) notes that there have recently been several highly publicised appeals against criminal convictions around the world where forensic evidence has played a significant role in the identification of suspects. Broeder further notes that these have at least partly been associated with inadequate standards of forensic expertise. The following case studies involve examples of Type I errors (false positives in fingerprint matching) made by examiners. Case Study 1: Shirley McKie In January 1997, DC Shirley McKie attended a crime scene in Kilmarnock, Scotland as part of an investigation into the murder of Marion Ross. A single mark found at the scene was attributed to DC McKie who denied under oath that it could be hers. DC McKie was subsequently charged with perjury. At her trial, two fingerprint experts disputed the mark belonged to DC McKie. A jury later found DC McKie not guilty of perjury. In 2008, the Scottish Government appointed Sir Anthony Campbell to hold a public inquiry into the identification and verification of fingerprints associated with the case of HM Advocate v McKie in 1999. Sir Campbell noted that [t]he community of fingerprint experts is deeply divided over the case of Shirley McKie and that some experts are perceived by others to be so closely associated with colleagues or organisations that have expressed an opinion that they are not universally regarded as being independent. (The Fingerprint Inquiry, 2011) Case Study 2: Brandon Mayfield In 2004, the Federal Bureau of Investigation identified Brandon Mayfields fingerprints as a match to a single mark found on a bag containing explosives used in the Madrid train bombings on 11 March 2004. Mayfields fingerprints had been initially retrieved as a potential match using the FBIs Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS). Upon closer examination, three fingerprint experts reviewing the initial result each confirmed that the mark belonged to Mayfield. (Stacey, 2004) The FBI launched a covert operation and Mayfield was subsequently arrested on 6 May 2004. An independent fingerprint expert appointed by the court to review the evidence (who also knew that a positive match had already been made) also concluded that the mark found did belong to Mayfield. Spanish Police informed the FBI that they had identified the mark as belonging to an Algerian national. After examining the prints of the Algerian national, the FBI released Mayfield from custody. The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) concluded that the reason for the misidentification was due to the unusual similarity between the [latent print] and Mayfields known fingerprint which had confused three experienced FBI examiners and a court-appointed expert. (US Department of Justice, 2006) Discussion Fingerprint evidence was first used in the UK in 1858 and is the most common form of forensic evidence used at court today. Fingerprint evidence has also been raised as one of the most important categories of forensic evidence admitted at court. However, a study conducted by Baldwin and McConville (1980) found that forensic evidence played a significant role in only five per cent of cases presented at court. Inman and Rudin (2002:1) describe forensic science as an applied science based on the laws of physics and chemistry. (Inman Rudin, 2002) Whilst this might provide an appropriate definition of forensic science, it ignores the importance of psychology in forensic evidence. The reliability of fingerprints as a means of identification (individualization) for purpose of evidence at court continues to be generally accepted by academia and the criminal justice system. Mnookin (2001:16) argues that scrutiny of expert evidence does not take place in a cultural vacuum and infers that fingerprint evidence was accepted too quickly in US courts. In 2013, a US District Court Judge ruled that the process fingerprint identification failed to meet three of the four criteria set for scientific evidence. The technique hadnt been scientifically tested Wasnt subject to scientific peer review Didnt possess a known rate of error The ruling means that whilst the court accepts that the process of fingerprint analysis does not meet the standards set for scientific evidence, the testimony of expert fingerprint analysts may still be admissible as evidence at court. Because the validity of fingerprint evidence is primarily based upon the credibility expert witnesses, challenges as to the validity of fingerprint evidence need to address the psychological aspects of forensic science, in other words the potential cognitive (contextual and confirmation) biases of forensic experts resulting in false identification. Part of this effort might involve simple solutions such as shielding fingerprint examiners from the details of crimes being investigated or having all fingerprint experts directly appointed by the courts. Other requirements might involve a minimum of two marks or more having to match the prints of a suspect before it can be used as evidence at court.

Essay --

Thales of Miletus (modern day Turkey) was said to be the very first Greek philosopher, scientist and mathematician. Although little is known about Thales, it is recorded that he lived between 624 BC – 546 BC. Thales was the founder of the Milesian school and also known as one of the Seven Wise Men (Stokes). Most of his accomplishments are speculated upon since none of his writings survived, and all sources seem to be non-existent. All that is known about his thoughts came from Aristotle, the four statements are as follows: (1) The world originated from water; (2) The world floats on water; (3) The world has many gods; (4) Soul produces motion (Burnet). Aristotle was very hesitant in writing these claims, stating that even by his time Thales was known only by word of mouth and not through hard evidence. Thales was said to be a devoted traveler and it is mainly through the writings of Aristotle why Thales is considered the â€Å"father of science† and the first pre- Socratic Greek philosopher. Aside from the writings of Thales, he was also an astronomer and mathematician. According to the Greek writer Xenophanes, it is believed that Thales was the first to predict a solar eclipse in 585 BC. This prediction startled Ionia and ended up stopping the battle between Lydian Alyattes and the Median Cyaxares. It is said that Thales used Babylonian astronomy in his prediction of the solar eclipse. Thales also wrote a manual for sailors and achieved a fortune by using his theories in astronomy to predict when olive crops would grow and then buying the land. This was mainly accomplished so that Thales could prove it was possible to make money as a philosopher (Burnet). As a mathematician, Thales is famous for his knowledge in geometry a... ...phy. Peitho's Web, n.d. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. . Burnet, John. Greek Philosophy: Thales to Plato. London: Burnet, 2008. Print. Livingstone, Richard W., Sir, and Gilbert, Murray. "The Legacy of Greece." The Legacy of Greece : Internet Archive. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 21 Dec. 2007. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. . Lytton, Bulwe E. The Lost Tales of Miletus. Charleston: BiblioBazaar, 2009. Print. O'Grady, Patricia F. Thales of Miletus: The Beginnings of Western Science and Philosophy. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate, 2002. Print. Stokes, Phillips. Philosophy: 100 Essential Thinkers: The Ideas That Have Shaped Our World. London: Arcturus, 2012. Print. "Thales." 2014. The Famous People website. Feb 12 2014. .

Gun Control in Canada Essay -- Argumentative Persuasive Essays

  Ã‚  Ã‚   There has been considerable debate recently in Canada over the issue of gun control. The Canadian parliament enacted the Firearms Act to enforce gun control by requiring gun owners to register their firearms. Just recently, the government of Alberta lead in a charge, including five other provinces and numerous pro-gun groups, complaining that the law is unconstitutional and intrudes on provincial jurisdiction. They also claim that the act infringes on property and civil rights that are guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Parliament contends that the government of Canada is within its rights to protect public safety. Pro-gun control organizations, police chiefs and the City of Toronto also back the Firearms Act. The enacting of the Firearms Act by the government of Canada is legitimately constitutional and is within the jurisdiction of Parliament as it only seeks to protect the well being of Canadians. Furthermore, this legislation does not intrude on provincial jurisdiction because it is a representation of all Canadian’s rights.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Canadian law that requires the licensing and registration of handguns has been around since the 1930’s. The new statute, enacted in 1995 is currently under heated debate, the act extends the licensing and registration requirements to shotguns and rifles. Wendy Cukier, president of the Coalition for Gun Control says, â€Å"More Canadians are killed with rifles and shotguns every year than with handguns†. The ultimate purpose of the Act according to the government is to reduce firearm offences and violent crimes including murder. Moreover, Cukier believes the real issue is saving lives, as licensing and registration help make gun owners more accountable. She also points out a list of kids killed with firearms- a boy shot at a birthday party, a Grade 3 student shot as his twin played with a rifle. Gun control advocates may also highlight some other incidents involving firearms including the 1989 massacre at Montreal’s Ecole Polytechnique that claimed the lives of fourteen women and the recent school shooting that killed a fifteen-year old student. Ironically, the shooting occurred at a Taber, Alberta high school, the same province that is leading a fight to strike down the Firearms Act as unconstitutional. On February 21 and 22 of this year, the Supreme Court of Canada was asked to rule whether th... ...legitimate recreational pursuits; and guns are the tools of some trades. At the same time, guns intimidate; guns maim; and guns kill. It is precisely because of this paradox that guns are used for good as well as evil- that controversy surrounds government efforts at gun control.† It is clear that the new firearms legislation is looking out only for the best interests of the citizens of Canada. Public safety and well-being undoubtedly takes precedence to a traditional gun culture. The argument by pro-gun advocates that licensing and registering firearms will turn them into criminals is invalid since guns have the potential to seriously injure and kill people and thus, should be treated with caution and special care.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Firearms Act enacted by the government of Canada should be considered as a positive notion and not as a law that invades on property and civil rights. The reason why Canada is a safe country is all due to our strict gun control laws. Moreover, if this statute was struck down as unconstitutional, there is no doubt in my mind that Canada would head towards a gun culture society that would inevitably lead to more violent crime and murders involving firearms.

Acct553 Homework Es

1. (TCO A) A taxpayer may litigate a tax dispute without first paying the tax in the:  (Points : 5)|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  U. S. District Court. U. S. Tax Court. U. S. Court of Federal Claims. All of the above | 2. (TCO F) A business bad debt is deductible for tax purposes as a(n):  (Points : 5)|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  ordinary business deduction. short-term capital loss. long-term capital loss. miscellaneous itemized deduction. | 3. (TCO I) Under the cash method of tax accounting, tax deductions are generally taken when:  (Points : 5)|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  payment is made. the liability arises. there is net income to absorb the expense.None of the above | 4. (TCO A) Which of the following constitutes tax evasion? (Points : 5)|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Arranging your affairs to keep your tax liability as low as possible under the tax law   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Failing to disclose a tax liability from a completed transaction   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Trying to maximize profits Trying to minimize your tax liability. | 5. (TCO C) Which of the following items is subject to federal income tax? (Points : 5)|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Interest on U. S. Treasury bonds Gambling winnings Interest on loans made in the ordinary course of business   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  All of the above | 6. (TCO B) Sam owes Bob $8,000.Bob cancels (forgives) the debt. The cancellation is not a gift, but Sam is insolvent. Which of the following statements is correct concerning the impact of this transaction? (Points : 5)|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Both Bob and Sam recognize $8,000 of taxable income. Bob recognizes $8,000 of taxable income. Sam recognizes $8,000 of taxable income. Neither Bob nor Sam has any taxable income from this transaction. | 7. (TCO I) David, a cash basis taxpayer, owns two rental properties. Based on the following information, compute the amount that he must include in his 2012 gross rental income.Property #1, security deposit on one-year lease received 2/1/12 All of deposit returned at lease end: $1,000 Property #1, payment received 2/1/12 for last month of lease(1/13): $900 Property #1, rental income received in 2012 2/12-12/12: $8,000   Property #2, rental income received in 2012 1/12-12/12: $9,600 Property #2, security deposit received 1/1/12 to be used for last month's rent: $800 Property #2, rent 1/13 received 12/28/12: $800  (Points : 5)|   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  $21,100 $19,300 $18,500 $20,100 | 8. (TCO F) Section 197's intangible assets, such as patents and trademarks, are amortized for tax purposes over:   (Points : 5)| years. 15 years. 10 years. 20 years. | 9. (TCO E) Explain the constructive receipt doctrine. (Points : 17)  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  | 10. (TCO G) Answer the following questions concerning tax laws. a. What roles do the U. S. Constitution and U. S. Congress play in creating the tax law? b. What does the common body of tax law (CBOTL) consist of? Br iefly explain how a tax bill becomes a tax law. c. What role does the Internal Revenue Service play in interpreting, and providing guidance on, the tax law? What types of tax law guidance are published by the IRS? (Points : 18)  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  |

Forbiden Lies

[pic] Roxie Releasing presents the 2008 US theatrical release of FORBIDDEN LIE$ A film by Anna Broinowski Con or Artist WHO DO YOU BELIEVE? The journalist? The Chicago mobster? The murdered friend? The FBI? The violent husband? The extorted granny? The spurned lover? The outraged publisher? The embittered fan? The detective? The Muslim activist? The estranged father? The psychiatrist? The media? Yourself? A REAL LIFE THRILLER ABOUT NORMA KHOURI, THE PEOPLE SHE’S CONNED, AND HOW NOONE’S SAFE IN THE AGE OF SPIN. ? WINNER Best non-fiction Screenplay? Writer’s Guild of America (East and West) 2008 WINNER 20,000 Euro ‘Cult’ Prize ? Rome Film Festival 2007 ? WINNER Golden Gate Awards Special Jury Prize ? 2008 San Francisco International Film Festival ? WINNER Golden Award – long form documentary? 2008 Al Jazeera International Documentary Festival ? WINNER Best Film Script? 2008 NSW Premier’s Literary Awards ? WINNER 2 Australian Film Institut e Awards ? Best Documentary Feature Film 2007 Best Editing in a documentary 2007 ? WINNER 2 Film Critics’ Awards ? Best Feature Documentary – Film Ciritcs Circle of Australia Best Feature Documentary – Australian Film Critics’ Association ? Top Ten Audience Favourite ?Hotdocs, Toronto Adelaide International Film festival Melbourne International Film Festival ? Official Selection ? Sheffield International Documentary Festival Vancouver International Film Festival Rio International Film Festival Rome International Film Festival MOMA documentary fortnight, New York (USA) 2008 True/False Film Festival (USA) 2008 San Francisco International Film Festival (USA) 2008 Al Jazeera Film Festival (Qatar) 2008 Full Frame Documentary Festival (USA) 2008 Honolulu International film festival (USA) 2008 Silverdocs International Documentary festival (USA) 2008 S H O R T S Y N O P S I SIn July 2004, Norma Khouri, best-selling author of ‘Forbidden Love’, was exp osed as a fake. She’d won fame and fortune as a Jordanian virgin on the run from Islamic extremists who’d put a Fatwah on her head for her campaign against honour killings. But she was really Norma Bagain, a Chicago real-estate agent and mother of two, on the run from the FBI for one million dollars of fraud. Spinning murder, politics, greed and literary scandal into a web that ensnares us all, FORBIDDEN LIE$ is a real-life thriller about a brilliant con/artist, the people she’s duped, and why, despite everything, we still want to believe her. R E V I E W S ((( â€Å"Wildly entertaining and utterly compelling, Forbidden Lie$ is the documentary version of an airport novel – one you can’t take your eyes off†¦Riveting† Colin Fraser, Filmink _______________________________________________________________ (((( â€Å"As compelling as any thriller†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Michael Adams, Empire ____________________________________________________________ ___ (((( â€Å"This totally fascinating documentary†¦is made with considerable skill: it’s a tantalising real-life mystery. † David Stratton, At the Movies, ABC TV _______________________________________________________________ (((( Margaret Pomeranz, At the Movies, ABC TV ______________________________________________________________ (((( â€Å"This superb documentary†¦ is the best Australian film of the year. † Adrian Martin, The Australian _______________________________________________________________ (((( â€Å"This isn’t a dry documentary: rather it’s a chase movie†¦ † Rodney Chester, Courier Mail _______________________________________________________________ (((( â€Å"This unconventional documentary will mess with your mind†¦ † â€Å"A staggering coup†¦ † â€Å"Quite unlike any documentary you have seen†¦ † Leigh Paatch, Herald Sun ___________________________________________________ ____________ (((( What a coup†¦Funny, entertaining and clever. A marvellously inventive documentary, it peels away layers of a fascinating saga one-by-one†¦With this debut feature, (Broinowski) establishes herself as a bold new voice in Australian filmmaking, unafraid to take risks and be flamboyant. † Sacha Molitorisz, Sydney Morning Herald _______________________________________________________________ (((( â€Å"layered and visually inventive†¦Ã¢â‚¬  â€Å"riveting viewing† Rose Capp, Melbourne Times _______________________________________________________________ (((( â€Å"Fascinating and surprisingly engaging. † Tim Hunter, SBS Radio ______________________________________________________________ (((( â€Å"addictive viewing†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Andiee Paviou, Who Weekly _______________________________________________________________ (((( â€Å"engrossing†¦this is a documentary that will keep you on the edge of your seat. † â€Å"Made with a considerable degree of astonishment, unexpected affection and a large dose of humour†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Tom Ryan, Sunday Age _______________________________________________________________ (((( â€Å"gripping†¦as compelling as any dramatic feature you’re likely to see this year†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Mark Naglazas, The West Australian _______________________________________________________________ 9/10 You’ll want it to be longer†¦Ã¢â‚¬ Ã‚  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Try to see it in a cinema as this is a group experience, where everyone gasps at the same moments. † Rob Lowing, Sun Herald _______________________________________________________________ (((( â€Å"utterly fascinating†Ã‚  Ã¢â‚¬Å"a very slick presentation, and the story it presents has enough twists and turns to keep an audience enthralled. † Tracey Prisk, Sunday Telegraph _______________________________________________________________ ((((( â€Å"documentary gold† â€Å"a brain-twisting, humor ous journey which will leave you wide-eyed with a mix of wonder, admiration and disgust. â€Å"Like a true-life Catch Me If You Can with chicks. † Annika Priest, Melbourne Leader _______________________________________________________________ (((( â€Å"A fascinating, clever documentary. † Sunday Mail (Adelaide) _______________________________________________________________ (((( â€Å"mesmerizing†¦hooks the viewer in†¦Ã¢â‚¬  â€Å"a gripping piece of on-the-fly filmmaking† Jeff Crawford, Messenger Newspapers (Adelaide) _______________________________________________________________ (((( SBS Movie Show _______________________________________________________________ â€Å"Fair minded and meticulously researched† Vicky Roach, Marie Claire ______________________________________________________________ â€Å"Forbidden Lie$ is a dazzling performance, both by Khouri and director Anna Broinowski†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Martyn Pedlar, Three Thousand __________ _____________________________________________________ â€Å"Shot and constructed like a courtroom drama†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Susan Skelly, The Bulletin _______________________________________________________________ â€Å"The real coup here is the unlimited access to Khouri herself, who jumps at the opportunity to tell her side of the story†¦this absorbing documentary is a thought-provoking conversation starter well worth catching. † Matt Riviera ______________________________________________________________ â€Å"A compelling yarn†¦Forbidden Lie$ looks likely to endure as its subject’s monument. † Jake Wilson, The Age Every great crime says something about the times we live in. Warren Beatty, THE HEIST [pic] S Y N O P S I S How often do you get inside the mind of a con woman – â€Å"one of the best ever†, according to the Chicago cop desperate to track her down? Norma Khouri is a thief, a saint, a seductress and a sociopath – depending on who’s talking. Men want to marry her, Islamic extremists want to kill her and the global publishing industry wishes she’d just disappear.Those she duped with her best-selling ‘true story’ about the honour killing of her best friend Dalia in Jordan, Forbidden Love, number 500,000 readers, publishers and journalists in 15 countries. But her victims don’t end there. When Norma’s book was exposed as a fake by Australian journalist Malcolm Knox in July 2004, the world learned that Norma was not, as she’d claimed on Western chatshows, a Jordanian Catholic virgin on-the-run from bloodthirsty Muslim patriarchs who’d placed a fatwah on her head for her outspoken campaign against honour crimes in the Middle East, but 34 year old Norma Bagain a. . a. Touliopoulos, a married Chicago real-estate agent and mother of two, under investigation since 1999 by the FBI for one million dollars’ of fraud. Knox’s scoop rocked the liter ary world and prompted the FBI to reopen their files on Norma. Norma took a lie detector test in self defence, sued Knox for defamation, dumped her kids with ex-heroin addict and ‘tart-with-a-heart of gold’ Rachel Richardson in Bribie Island Queensland, and fled to the U. S. A with $350,000 in advances still owing to her outraged Publishers. She’s been in hiding ever since. And now she wants to talk.Weaving between the literary salons of London, the mosque-lined vistas of Jordan, the beachside suburbs of Queensland and the seamy Chicago backstreets of Norma’s dubious past, FORBIDDEN LIE$ pits Norma’s tale against the stories of those she conned. There’s Mary Baravikas, who died in an underfunded Chicago hospital after Norma alledgedly cashed in her life savings and stole her house. There’s Rachel Richardson, $15,000 poorer thanks to Norma, who still swears her friend is a †sweet person who’d bake pies for everyone in the s treet – she’s just got dark secrets only she can answer†.And there’s Norma’s estranged husband with alledged ties to the Chicago mob, John Toliopoulos, whom Norma claims forced her to commit her crimes at gunpoint. Meanwhile, Forbidden Love has just been released in the Arab world as fiction, Middle Eastern women continue to be murdered by male relatives in ‘crimes of honour’ with apparent impunity, and Human Rights Groups have yet to receive a cent of the royalties Norma Khouri promised them.Jordanian honour crimes activist Rana Husseini, furious at the damage that Norma’s â€Å"fake book† has done to her cause, is demanding to know why the 73 factual errors in Forbidden Love slipped past publishing giants Simon & Schuster, Random House and Transworld just before the Iraq invasion, when racist potboilers about evil Muslim men with mysteriously veiled women on the covers were selling like hotcakes. So who was really cashin g in? Who is to blame?And does it matter that Norma lied? FORBIDDEN LIE$ lets you be the judge. As we follow Norma to Jordan to meet with people she says will â€Å"prove that Dalia existed, that she was murdered, and that the media has lied†, we also investigate Norma’s criminal past. Will the FBI arrest her? Is her passion to stop honour crimes genuine, or just a new con? Who do you believe, as you watch Norma’s web of stories spinning ever faster, ensnaring everyone, including the filmmaker?Is she a calculating sociopath, a damaged soul craving the limelight, a genuine martyr, or simply a monster of our age, who states that â€Å"if Bush and Blair can spin the truth about WMDs to justify bombing innocent people then why can’t I spin Dalia’s story to save women from being murdered on a daily basis? † In a spin-driven era, as the lines between truth and fiction grow increasingly blurred, FORBIDDEN LIE$ is a real-life thriller for our time. Weaving murder, deceit, greed, the East/West clash and an international literary scandal into a web that entangles us all, Norma Khouri’s real-life drama is even stranger than her fiction.We all love watching a successful con story – the more dangerous the better. But this time, it’s for real. [pic] Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities. Truth isn’t. MARK TWAIN P R O D U C T I O N N O T E S â€Å"The marriage between con-artist and filmmaker is a match made in heaven: both use a million tiny deceits to manipulate the way we think and feel; both are in the business of making illusions real. † ANNA BROINOWSKI When director Anna Broinowski read Malcolm Knox’s Sydney Morning Herald article exposing Norma Khouri as a hoax in July 2004, she knew she’d found the subject for her next documentary. I wanted to know what kind of woman could be so brilliant that while on the run from the FBI she could reinvent herself as a Jordanian virgin with a Fatwah on her head, write a best-seller, and convince the best publishing and media minds in the world that she was telling the truth. † Teaming up with producer Sally Regan in early 2005, Anna invited Norma (then lying low in Chicago) to fly to San Fransisco to attend the premiere of her last documentary, HELEN’S WAR (about anti-nuclear activist Dr. Helen Caldicott), at the Castro Theatre.Norma liked what she saw, and agreed to tell Anna her side of the story on the condition that Anna make a film putting Honour Crimes back in the spotlight. Anna, smitten by Norma, agreed: â€Å"on the first day of the shoot I was telling the crew to hide their credit cards, that Norma was a notorious con-woman; by the third day, Norma had convinced me that her book was not a hoax, that she was utterly genuine, and that everything the media had written about her criminal past in Chicago was a lie. She promised to take us back to Jordan to prove her friend really was murdered: how could I not believe her? Anna’s journey from Norma convert to con-victim is just one of several betrayals captured in the labyrinth of Truth and Spin that is FORBIDDEN LIE$. By the time Anna and DOP Kathryn Milliss got to Jordan with Norma (and her American ‘body guard’, Jeremey Lackowski), it was obvious that Norma was taking them for a ride. Key witnesses disappeared, locations evaporated, and the actual hair salon, in which Norma had promised to introduce Dalia’s friends to the camera, fell apart when Norma’s mysterious ‘cousin’ failed to arrive with the key. I realized I could no longer make a film vindicating Norma; that this had become a portrait of a con woman whether I liked it or not†, says Anna. Yet through it all, Anna and Norma have remained friends: â€Å"there is a sense with Norma that everything is a game for her, that she relishes the challenge of having to improvise when confronted, of having to convince you to believe her all over again. I can’t help admiring her audacity†. The film’s style was designed to directly reflect the mental sleights of hand Norma plays out on her victims. Armed with a 1. million dollar budget, the filmmakers worked hard with visual effects company Resin and DOPs Kathryn Milliss and Toby Oliver to create CGI and in-camera illusions; the expense of the round-the-world shoot was offset by filming several of the Jordanian scenes in Adelaide with the imaginative help of designer Robert Webb and his team. Above all, the filmmakers were keen to create a ‘real-life thriller’ rather than a conventional documentary: FORBIDDEN LIE$ owes more to the narrative structures of con movies like CATCH ME OF YOU CAN and HOUSE OF GAMES than it does to non-fiction genres. What excites me about FORBIDDEN LIE$ is that people walk out with more questions than answers. I don’t know if we got to the bottom of who Norma is, I don’t think e ven Norma knows who she is†, says Sally Regan. â€Å"There can be no absolute conclusion with someone like Norma†, agrees Anna. â€Å"Should we judge Norma, or the spin-driven climate that allowed her to thrive? If the audience walks out less inclined to trust what they are told, by anyone, especially the filmmaker, then that’s a good thing! †With a successful Australian release through Palace in 2007, 2 AFI wins, Top Ten audience votes at Hotdocs, Melbourne and Adelaide Film Festivals, international prizes including the San Francisco Golden Gate Special jury Prize and the Rome Film Fest ‘Cult’ Award, and distribution deals in the US, Japan and the Middle East, FORBIDDEN LIE$ is satisfying people’s desires to be entertainingly deceived. Even Norma, now selling car insurance and studying human rights law at night-school in Chicago, has seen the film and enjoyed it.Of course she had an outrageous new comeback to every allegation made agai nst her†¦ but all of that is revealed in the DVD, released by Madman in April 2008! [pic] The public will believe anything, so long as it is not based on the truth. Edith Sitwell T E A M ANNA BROINOWSKI (Director/Writer/Producer) is a NIDA acting graduate who has been making award winning films for international audiences for the past ten years. Her 2004 film Helen’s War – portrait of a dissident (CBC/ZDF/FFC/SBS) won an Australian Film Institute award for Best Director (Documentary) and Best Documentary at the Sydney Film Festival Dendy Awards.It was nominated for a Canadian Gemini, an Independent Film Award and an Australian Film Critics Circle award. It sold to Sundance Channel, screened theatrically in Australia and the US and toured the UK as part of the 2005 British/Australian Film Festival. Two of Anna’s other documentaries, Hell Bento!! (SBS/AFC) and Sexing the Label (SBS/FFC), both had theatrical releases, screened at several international film fes tivals, sold widely overseas, and can still be found in the cult section of Australian video stores.Anna’s other films are Romancing the Chakra (ABC/FFC) and the shorts Tsunami (part of the Slamdance DVD 12 angry Women) and Burqa (part of the 2004 Oz feature Time to Go John. ) Anna’s past awards include Best Australian Documentary (Sydney Film Festival), 1 Bronze and 1 Silver Plaque (Columbus Film Festival), Best Documentary (Film West) and Best Documentary Director (Films des Femmes, France). SALLY REGAN (Producer) was awarded the Kenneth Myer Fellowship upon graduation from the Australian Film Television and Radio School and has produced film and television in Australia, Europe, Asia and America for the past 15 years.Her documentary, First Look, won the Fuji award, and her short film, Swerve, opened the Berlin Film Festival. In 1997 Sally won the AFC Distinctly Australian Script Editing award. From 1999 to 2003 Sally was Business Affairs Manager of Documentary Produc tion at Film Australia, Australia’s leading documentary agency. Since then, she has co-produced the international Russell Crowe-narrated series The Colour of War, and produced National Treasures, Korean Anzac, Peter Berner’s Loaded Brush and Road to Tokyo.Sally is currently developing a number of projects, including the feature film Axe Fall, a recent participant in the competitive NSWFTO Aurora script workshop (the development stomping ground of acclaimed Australian dramas SOMERSAULT and LITTLE FISH). We are never deceived: we deceive ourselves. GOETHE [pic] M A I N C A S T The ArtistNorma Khouri The PressMalcolm Knox Rana Husseini Caroline Overington Jon Yates The LawDet. Ed Torian, NYPD Frank Bochte FBI Dawn Lawkowski The FriendsRachel Richardson Kara Elliott Maree Elliott The ClanJohn ToliopoulosMajid Bagain Cousin Faris Asma Bagain The LiteratiPatrick Walsh Larry Finlay David Leser The ActivistsDr. Amal al Sabbagh Nadia Shamroukh The MuscleJeremy Lackowski John Ak dikman Anna Hermann The MedicsCharles v. Ford MD Dr. Mu’men Hadidi Dr. Hani Jahshan Dr. Nasri Khoury The ActorsDalia: Linda Mutawi Mohammed: Shahin Azimi Mahmood: Fariborz Zareei Michael: Farhad Noori Norma: Sara Azadegan M A I N C R E W Director/writerAnna Broinowski ProducersSally Regan and Anna Broinowski CinematographersKathryn Milliss and Toby Oliver ACSEditorsAlison Croft and Vanessa Milton Titles/CGIResin 35 mm Blow-up/additional CGITim Trumble Sound design and MixCraig Carter and Peter Smith Drama designerRobert Webb Covers composerMax Sharam Completed July 2007 Format 35 mm Sound6 track Dolby Duration 104 minutes FORBIDDEN LIE$ was produced by the Film Finance Corporation Australia, produced and developed in association with the New South Wales Film and Television Office, and produced in association with the South Australian Film Corporation, the Adelaide Film Festival and Palace Films.It was developed and produced with the financial assistance of  the Australian F ilm Commission and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and developed with the financial assistance of the South Australian Film Corporation. Distributed in Australia and NZ by Palace Films. International Sales by Jonathan Page of Becker International. [email  protected] com. au US Theatrical release through Roxie Releasing, contact Bill Banning at [email  protected] com or Rick Norris at [email  protected] com and phone (415) 431 3611 [pic] A half truth is a whole lie. YIDDISH PROVERB

Saving Private Ryan & a Fortunate Life Speech

Would you ever sacrifice your own life in order to save a stranger? Could you imagine watching fellow soldiers being shot and blown up all around you? Could you survive months on end in a war zone? Is one man’s life worth the lives of 8? Both Saving Private Ryan and A Fortunate Life depict war as being a major sacrifice for those involved. Both texts show the mental and physical hardship associated with war and the bonds and mateship shared between soldiers.Saving Private Ryan tells the story of 8 young soldiers who risk their own lives in order to save the life of one man. The first 20 minutes of the film is the most effective in illustrating the horrific conditions and images troops are subjected to. The opening scene being hailed as the most realistic interpretation of war is only enhanced by the use of a hand held camera that provides the audience with a view of war through a soldier’s eye, as well as adding to the chaos and confusion surrounding them.With the const ant sound effects of machine guns, shells and screams for help played throughout the movie and the use of silence when Captain Miller is defended by a shell, allows the audience to get an idea of the mental and physical hardship troops are exposed to and the difficulty they would encounter to overcome these problems. A strong message displayed in the film is that of loyalty, sacrifice and mateship. 8 men sacrifice their lives to save a man that they had never even heard of. Sharing a bond that only other troops would understand, they make their way across the country to find Private Ryan.Once found, Private Ryan refuses to leave as he believes his life is no greater than the soldiers he has been fighting with. He is not willing to leave until his mission is complete. This shows enormous sacrifice, not only by the men who found Ryan, but Ryan himself for not wanting to leave his fellow soldiers in their time of need. These messages are also made clear by Albert Facey in A Fortunate L ife. The descriptive language used through the book demonstrates the horrific events during war. This can be seen at the end of chapter 52 when Facey is describing the D-Day invasion onto the beaches of Gallipoli.He describes it as being â€Å"terribly frightening† and â€Å"shocking†, as well as this being descriptive language it is also a huge understatement, that Facey tends to use a great deal through the book. Both the understatements and descriptive language allow the reader to see the extent of the physical and mental damage on the troops. It emphasises the reality of the horrors they face from day to day. The use of dates, places, factual information and maps help in allowing the reader to receive a greater understanding of Facey’s journey and the obstacles overcome.Although the book is written in very simple language the message of sacrifice is made clear. An example of this is shown when Facey is injured and is offered a way out of the war, being prese nted with the opportunity to leave for the hospital ship, but declines as his battalion is already shorthanded and cannot afford to lose any more troops. This also shows the bonds troops share with one another, Facey is willing to suffer the ongoing pain in order to help out his fellow comrades. Both texts show the immensity of sacrifice each soldier is willing to give.Weather its saving a stranger’s life or fighting in the war, each and every soldier is doing there bit in ensuring that we all live in a free society. The attitude of loyalty they show towards one another is a testament to how we all should live by our own friends. The obstacles they encounter and the processes they embark on to overcome the physical and mental suffering, demonstrates that the majority of our own problems are nothing compared to the day to day torment soldiers are going through.

The role of nuclear energy in the field of medicine

Nuclear energy is a type of energy which is released by a reaction called as nuclear reaction. There are two main types of nuclear reactions, one is called fission and the other one is fusion: In Fission reaction it releases a nuclear energy when a single heavy nucleus seperates into two smaller ones, causing energy to be released . The most common element used to undergo nuclear fission is uranium because uranium has many favorable properties. Uranium nuclei can be easily split by applying neutrons at them. The fission reaction is used to make heat for producing steam, which is then used by a turbine to generate electricity. but if in a fusion reaction a two single nuclei combines together to form another nucleus which is heavier. This reaction occurs only under very hot conditions. Nuclear fusion is used to generate a lot of energy in the form of light, hear and radiation. This energy supports life on our planet and it was the only energy early mankind used. 1) â€Å"What Is Nuclear Energy.† What Is Nuclear Energy. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Aug. 2012. . 2) â€Å"Nuclear Energy.† ThinkQuest. Oracle Foundation, n.d. Web. 22 Aug. 2012. http://library.thinkquest.org/3471/nuclear_energy.html Picture 1: 1) Picture 2: â€Å"Free Energy: Nuclear Fusion in the Quran.† Pakalert Press. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Aug. 2012. . Scientists have discovered that nuclear energy can be used in treating various diseases such as cancer, heart disease, endocrine, gastrointestinal and other abnormalities found inside the body. Nuclear energy provides a good solution in treating certain diseases affecting people in today’s world. In the field of Cardiopulmonary. Nuclear energy is used in scanning and visualizing blood flow and also heart function. In treating cancer diseases such as Melanoma and breast cancer, Nuclear energy can have their lymph mondes located first before doing the surgery. It can also find out whether there are respiratory problems and blood flow in lungs. Another major important use of Nuclear energy is for the treatment of various cancers such as Melanoma and breast cancer. Patients having Melanoma and breast cancer can have their lymph nodes found first before doing the surgery, thyroid cancer and tumors that spread to the bones are also cured by using Nuclear energy. In other diagnostic use of nuclear energy, Nuclear energy is used to evaluate tumors, arthritis, fractures and infenction of bones. Locating the area where there is an infection, identifying problems causing gallbladder inflammation and bleeding into the bowel can be treated using nuclear energy. It can also be used to investigate brain abnormalities, such as loss of memory, seizures and abnormalities in blood flow. â€Å"General Nuclear Medicine.† Nuclear Medicine, General. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Aug. 2012. . â€Å"How Is Nuclear Energy Used in Medicine?† Yahoo! Contributor Network. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Aug. 2012. . The effectiveness of using nuclear energy to solve diseases is very effective because for eg; if a patient having cancer undergoes surgery, before doing the surgery doctors need to locate the specific area where the cancer are located to do this X-ray tomography or (CT) scans work by using nuclear tracers to emmit gamma rays once the rays are inside the body, special cameras are able to pick up the emitted gamma rays and show to the photo of the organ or the part where the cancer is to the doctor. This helps the doctors to successfully treat the patient. Another more advanced technology called a Positron Emission Tomography (PET) isused in determining patients with cardiac conditions, problems in the brain and cancer, first positron-emitting radionuclides are injected into the patients body and then they gravitate to the organ and they begin to quickly decay. They emmit a positron and an electron from inside of the patients body an two very distinct gamma rays which the PET scans and forms an image. The photo helps doctors to locate where the problem is, this is more advanced than CT scans. Comparing methods like CT scans and PET scans to other methods like Endoscopic ultrasound and others to determine where the cancer is to methods like brain scan, the method of CT scans are likely to be more dangerous and may harm the patient because in CT scans they use contrast agents which are chemical substances that are exposed to the human body when they are running the test. Contrast agents like Iodine is the contrast agent which is the most commonly used contrast agent can cause allergic reactions to some patients which includes a rash, a warm sensation or even in a worst case scenario difficulty to breathe normally. Also in CT scans it involves patients to get exposed to ionizing radiation which is known to cause cancer. This becomes a problem for people who need multiple scans and also for children because children are more sensitive to radiation than to adults. So even though CT scans can help doctors to locate where the disease is they aren’t that reliable and can be harmful as well if they are not used properly. â€Å"Symptoms & Diagnosis.† Symptoms & Diagnosis. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Aug. 2012. . Cioffi, Rebecca. â€Å"How Does Nuclear Medicine Actually Kill Cancer Cells?† EHow. Demand Media, 30 Apr. 2009. Web. 26 Aug. 2012. . Social: The use of CT scans to perform scans inside the body for the location of diseases inside the body can be very useful and can help to treat the patients. But CT scans are high tech devices and are very expensive which are only available in developed countries, for poorer countries like in Africa have no technology and money to get CT scanners and have to rely on alternative solutions to cure their diseases, Which sometimes give inaccurate results. Environment: CT scanners need nuclear energy to produce the image inside the patient’s body. Nuclear energy is one of the world’s most efficient energy producer and electricity. This helps the society very much. But nuclear energy also can cause a great deal amount of damage to the environment. If a CT scanner has a gamma ray leak out it can cause greenhouse gas emissions to rise and harm the environment. Crops and drinking water exposed to gamma ray can cause lung tumor and thyroid cancer if consumed, Animals and marine life will be affected by it also, so people who are responsible for maintenance of the scanners must maintain the machine well or not there will be a great consequence to face. From making this essay I came to know about the great use of nuclear power in the field of medicine, They can detect cancer, tumor and hemorrhage inside a person’s body and help doctors in treating them. But I also learnt that there is a limitation to this technology because some people have allergic reactions from nuclear energy and if exposed too much to a person’s body instead of treating the disease it can cause one, so we must be responsible using this strong energy.