At least eight dead as building collapses during construction in China

Sunday, July 6, 2008

At least eight construction workers have died and thirteen more are injured after a building collapsed during construction in Qiuzhigou Village, a suburb of China’s Wuhan City. It is unclear how many more if any are trapped as the project’s coordinator fled and is being sought by police.

The collapse occurred at 5 p.m. local time yesterday and reduced the four-story structure to a five-metre pile of rubble. The building was a private residence and was illegal as authorities had not been informed of it. Its location in an area accessible only via narrow alleys is hampering search and rescue efforts as heavy equipment such as cranes is having difficulty reaching the scene.

Around 100 rescuers continue to pick through the rubble in the rain. An investigation has been launched.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=At_least_eight_dead_as_building_collapses_during_construction_in_China&oldid=1100107”

Accident Claim For Horse Riding Injury

By Jene Pedder

Horse Riding is seen as a lovely relaxing sport, with many children starting horse riding when there 4 or 5. People often don’t realise the weight and power of horse’s even small young ones. In America alone there are over 30 million people riding horses every year and 2,300 under the age of 25 are injured every year and need hospital treatment.

Horses are heavy creatures and can weigh up to 1,500 pounds and can be as high as 3 metres tall. There are different kinds of horse riding from jumping, cross-country, stock work to pleasure riding. In jumping and cross-country the horses can travel as fast as 30mph and you’re on the back no straps just sitting on the saddle holding onto the ropes.

The most common way to injury yourself on a horse is to fall off, of course this can be very serious. Other ways are that of the horse bucking and throwing you off, you may be lucky and get thrown into some bushes but then you may not and you may become lodged in your stirrups and then get dragged along by the horse. Horse riding accidents don’t just happen whilst out on the horse, they also happen when someone’s handling, feeding or grooming the horse as some horses may be domesticated but no horse is 100% safe.

If you’re an inexperienced horse rider you should always tell the instructor, many instructors will then offer you one to one instruction. If you go out on a hack you may have someone holding your horse as well as yourself to keep the horse under control.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLEv-hPBsSQ[/youtube]

For safety reasons all horse riders should wear a hard shell helmet that is securely fastened and in good condition to protect your head if you have an accident. Fitted boots and nonskid gloves should be worn as well as fitted trousers and top. Before you venture out all your equipment should be checked and your stirrup positioned correctly for you. Many centres are now encouraging people to use body protecting gear including the body protector which protects your ribs and soft tissues if you fall and the rest of your chest.

The most common injuries in horse riding are:

— Wrist, Elbow and Shoulder Injuries

— Knee, Ankle and Foot Injuries

— Spinal Injuries

— Bruises, Sprains and Strains

— Broken Bones and Dislocations

— Head Injuries and Concussion – this is the injury which causes the most deaths

If you’ve fell of a horse, been kicked by a horse, trodden on by a horse whatever the situation if the accident wasn’t your fault and you believe you were given the correct training, right equipment you have a legal and civil right to claim compensation.

If you think you can’t afford to make a compensation claim then use a company who work on a No Win No Fee basis. This means you don’t have to pay a penny in legal fees. If your case is successful you will receive the full compensation payout, your solicitor will claim their costs from the other party’s insurance. If your case is unsuccessful you still don’t have to pay a penny, so what are you waiting for, don’t suffer in silence claim today!!

About the Author: Jene Pedder is the Webmaster of Accident Consult who specialize in

Personal Injury Claims

working on a No Win No Fee basis.

Source:

isnare.com

Permanent Link:

isnare.com/?aid=216340&ca=Legal

Bush may deploy military if bird flu breaks out

Tuesday, October 4, 2005

President Bush has asked Congress to discuss the option of allowing him to deploy military resources if avian flu breaks out in America.

“I’m concerned about what an avian flu outbreak could mean for the United States and the world,” said the president in a conference today. The president also expressed concern that local response would be slow, given the precedent provided by the recent gulf coast hurricane disasters, the aftermath of which has triggered widespread criticism for what many view as instances of long-delayed and inadequate delivery on the part of the white house and congress. “I want there to be a robust discussion about the best way for the federal government, in certain extreme circumstances, to be able to rally assets for the good of the people,” the President said previously.

Avian flu is not currently able to easily pass from human to human, limiting epidemics. The president and others warn that the virus may mutate into a form that more easily spreads through social contact.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Bush_may_deploy_military_if_bird_flu_breaks_out&oldid=2257790”

Google planning PayPal rival

Monday, June 20, 2005

Financial analysts say Google is planning an e-wallet service that could eventually compete with eBay’s payment service PayPal. Google has not confirmed the development.

The rumor is a first sign of Google’s expected expansion of revenue sources to capitalize on its advertising customer base and search-engine traffic. What form that expansion will take has been a hotly debated subject for the company whose stock valuation momentarily made it the world’s biggest media company on June 7, 2005. Even Microsoft has been mentioned as a possible future competitor.

Ebay’s stock valuation dipped more than 2% on the news. Paypal currently accounts for one-fifth of the company’s revenues. But one business analyst saw potential benefit for Paypal[1], depending on exactly how the “Google Wallet” takes shape. The uncertainty underlined the lack of substantive information behind the rumor.

According to the New York Times, the CEO of a major online merchant, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, was approached by Google to take part in this service. Steve Langdon, a Google spokesperson, declined to comment.

  • Spoken version of the article
Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Google_planning_PayPal_rival&oldid=1149279”

Banned film ‘The Profit’ appears on Web

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Copies of The Profit, a 2001 film blocked from distribution in the United States due to a court injunction won by the Church of Scientology, appeared on the Internet Friday on peer-to-peer file-sharing websites and on the video sharing site YouTube.

Directed by former film executive Peter N. Alexander, the movie has been characterized by critics as a parody of Scientology and of its founder L. Ron Hubbard. Alexander was a Scientologist for twenty years, and left the organization in 1997. The film was funded by Bob Minton, a former critic of Scientology who later signed an agreement with the Church of Scientology and has attempted to stop distribution of the film. Alexander has stated that the movie is based on his research into cults, and when asked by the St. Petersburg Times about parallels to Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard said: “I’ll let you draw that conclusion … I say it’s entirely fictional.”

The film was released in August 2001, and was shown at a movie theatre in Clearwater, Florida and at a premiere at the Cannes Film Festival in France. A Scientology spokesman gave a statement at the time saying “the movie is fiction and has nothing to do with Scientology”. The Church of Scientology later took legal action in an attempt to stop further distribution of the film. The Church of Scientology claimed that the film was intended to influence the jury pool in the wrongful death case of Scientologist Lisa McPherson, who died under Scientology care in Clearwater, Florida.

In April 2002, a Pinellas County, Florida judge issued a court order enjoining The Profit from worldwide distribution for an indefinite period. According to the original court injunction received by Wikinews, the movie was originally banned because the court found that it could be seen as a parody of Scientology. In his April 20, 2002 ruling on the injunction, Judge Robert E. Beach of the Sixth Judicial Circuit Court in Pinellas County, Florida wrote: “…an average person viewing the film entitled The Profit could perceive that it is a parody of the Church of Scientology”.

“To the extent that any person considered as a potential juror in evaluating any issues involving the Church of Scientology, the process of voir dire provides a fair and complete remedy to eliminate any potential juror that may possibly have been influenced to be less than fair and impartial,” added Beach.

Luke Lirot, the attorney for the film’s production company, announced on the film’s website on April 7, 2007 that “We have absolutely no exposure for any repercussions from the court order,” but that the film was still blocked from distribution due to an ongoing legal battle. Lirot wrote: “all that’s stopping the release of the movie is the legal battle with the partner who was compromised by Scientology (Robert Minton) and is currently using his power as partner to stop the release of the film.”

In an October 2007 article, The Times described the film as “banned in the US because of a lawsuit taken out against it by The Church of Scientology,” and Russ Kick’s The Disinformation Book of Lists included the film in his “List of 16 Movies Banned in the U.S.”. An 8-minute teaser segment from The Profit appeared on the film’s website and on the video sharing site YouTube in February 2008, and an attorney representing Bob Minton sent a letter to Luke Lirot requesting that the film clip be taken down. In a response letter, Lirot wrote that “Rather than damage any asset of the LLC, the short clip merely keeps the film in the public eye, and in a positive way.”

On Friday, copies of the film began to circulate on peer-to-peer file-sharing websites and on YouTube. A link related to the film’s appearance on the Internet on the community-based link aggregator website Digg.com had 3,638 “Diggs” – and hit the front page of the site’s Entertainment section on Saturday.

I had nothing to do with this release at all. But I’m happy it’s out there.

On Saturday, Scientology critic and Emmy award-winning journalist Mark Bunker put a streaming version of the film on his website, www.xenutv.com, and encouraged others to watch and discuss the film on a real-time chat channel. In a video posting to YouTube Saturday, Bunker said “I did not do it. I had nothing to do with it … I had nothing to do with this release at all. But I’m happy it’s out there … people are finally having a chance to see it. A lot of people have been curious over the years and there’s been a lot of interest in seeing the film, so finally you can.”

We have all wanted to see this movie that scientology kept hidden away from us. We have all wondered just how damning could this story be that we were banned from watching it.

On the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology, a poster by the username “Alexia Death” commented on the film’s appearance on the Internet in the context of censorship: “It is out! And so it is a WIN if many people review it even if they say it SUCKS! … Being bad is no cause to allow censorship … And being censored is no cause to assume its good”. A post to the blog Blogsreel commented: “We have all wanted to see this movie that scientology kept hidden away from us. We have all wondered just how damning could this story be that we were banned from watching it.”

In a post on Sunday to the message board attached to the official website for the film, attorney Luke Lirot asked that individuals stop distributing copies of The Profit over the Internet. Lirot wrote: “It has been brought to my attention that several unauthorized transmissions and downloads of this protected work have taken place over the last 72 hours. Such actions are copyright violations and are unlawful. I request that any further distribution and/or dissemination of this important work cease immediately and any copies of the work that have been downloaded please be deleted.” In his statement, Lirot recognized the rights of individuals under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, but also said that unauthorized distribution of the film “will only serve to harm the goal of vast distribution”.

Blog postings have attributed the film’s appearance on the Internet as part of the anti-Scientology movement Project Chanology organized by the Internet-based group Anonymous, but this has not been confirmed. Wikinews previously reported on international protests against Scientology which took place as part of Project Chanology on February 10 and March 15. A third international protest by Anonymous is scheduled for April 12. Titled “Operation Reconnect”, the third international protest will focus on highlighting Scientology’s practice of disconnection.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Banned_film_%27The_Profit%27_appears_on_Web&oldid=4579693”

Specifications Of Top Rate Used Cars

Specifications of Top-Rate Used Cars

by

Ivo Beutler

Used cars are common in the market today. Everyone is resorting to buying used cars because they are inexpensive and they have a large variety of car choices, ranging from simple sedans to luxury cars like Porsche and Jaguar. Used car companies also have numerous discount offers to choose from, so customers flock to them every now and then. If you want to buy used cars, whether for collection or investment purposes, you need to know the specifications of used cars worth your cash and time.

An exceptional used car looks brand new. When it comes to buying used cars, looks can be deceiving. Some retailers work hard to make sure that a used car would look brand new to their customers. Mechanics would furnish the car s exterior and interior so it would have a significant increase not only in design but also in sale value.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ct2LUz5Fhsc[/youtube]

A top-rate used car won t have any sign of defect. Used car retailers would do their best to repair obvious damages of the used car, so they can present it to their customers whole-heartedly. Apparently, a good used car has complete parts and modifications so that customers won t have a hard time maintaining it. A reliable warranty is also included with the used car you are prospecting, so make sure that you always ask for it whenever you are buying one.

Niagara Falls used car dealerships

appeal to many customers because the dealers have a solid reputation when it comes to servicing and maintaining the cars. These dealers would always make sure that you will get top-rate used cars that can even match the performance of brand new ones.

Niagara Falls used cars

, without a doubt, are top-rate cars. They have fine engines, radiators, chassis, wheels and even unscathed passenger seats. Whenever you see a defect after buying the car, you can contact the retailer and ask for service or repairs. Whenever you buy a used car, defects would be covered by the limited warranty.

You can always rely on

Niagara Falls used car dealerships

because of their positive standing in the used car industry. If you keep these specifications in mind, you would definitely save a great deal of cash and time and get a top-rate used car.

If you have questions, please visit us at www.autoparkniagara.ca/ for complete details and answers.

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com

U.S. Senate passes landmark health care reform bill

Thursday, December 24, 2009

The United States Senate has approved a hard-fought measure to overhaul the health care system. The vote will be followed by the difficult process of reconciling the Senate-passed bill with one approved by the House of Representatives, in order to get a final measure to President Barack Obama.

HAVE YOUR SAY
How do you feel about the bill’s passage? Do you think it will be effective or fail?
Add or view comments

“The yeas are 60, the nays are 39. H.R. 3590 as amended, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is passed,” Vice President Joe Biden announced. Senator Jim Bunning of Kentucky did not show up for the vote leading to the 39 nays. Mike Reynard, a spokesman for Bunning, said in an e-mail that “The senator had family commitments.”

The vice president presided over the Senate at the time of the vote in his role as President of the United States Senate.

As expected, Republicans voted against the bill while all Democrats and two Independents, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, voted for it.

At an estimated $87 billion, the measure would expand health insurance coverage to about 30 million more Americans currently without it, and create new private insurance marketplaces, or exchanges, to expand choice.

And, like the slightly more expensive measure passed by the House of Representatives, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, it would end a practice by private insurance companies of denying coverage to individuals with existing health problems.

Both the Senate and House measures would require nearly all Americans to purchase some form of insurance, while lower-income Americans would receive help from federal government subsidies.

This is a victory because we have affirmed that the ability to live a healthy life in our great country is a right and not merely a privilege for the select few.

In remarks before the vote, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Democrat from Nevada, said opponents had done everything they could to prevent the vote from taking place.

Speaking to reporters, Reid and others hailed the vote as a victory and a major step toward providing millions more Americans with access to health care. “This is a victory because we have affirmed that the ability to live a healthy life in our great country is a right and not merely a privilege for the select few,” Reid said.

Reid and others including Robert Byrd, the 92-year-old Democrat from West Virginia, paid tribute to Senator Edward Kennedy, who died this past August after spending decades of his career in the Senate pursuing health care reform.

When casting his vote Byrd said, “Mr. President, this is for my friend Ted Kennedy. Aye.”

Victoria Reggie Kennedy, the widow of Senator Kennedy, watched the proceedings from the Senate visitor’s gallery, as did Representative John Dingell, Democrat from Michigan, who has been a long time advocate of health care reform and who sponsored and introduced the House version of the health care reform bill.

In the final hours of debate on the Senate bill, Republicans asserted it would be ineffective and add sharply to the U.S. budget deficit.

Mr. President, this is for my friend Ted Kennedy. Aye.

Senator Jeff Sessions, Republican from Alabama said of the bill, “This legislation may have a great vision, it may have a great idea about trying to make the system work better. But it does not. These are huge costs [and] it’s not financially sound.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell vowed to defeat the bill when the Senate reconvenes in January saying, “This fight is not over. This fight is long from over. My colleagues and I will work to stop this bill from becoming law.”

Senator Olympia Snowe, a moderate Republican from Maine who helped approved the Senate Finance Committee’s version of health care reform, the America’s Healthy Future Act, earlier in the year and who remarked she may not vote on the final bill, said, “I was extremely disappointed,” noting that when the Democrats reached their needed 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, “there was zero opportunity to amend the bill or modify it, and Democrats had no incentive to reach across the aisle.”

Ahead are difficult negotiations with the House of Representatives to craft a final bill President Obama would sign into law. These talks, which will formally get under way early in the new year, will take place amid anger among many liberal House Democrats the Senate bill failed to contain a government-run public health insurance option.

This fight is not over. This fight is long from over. My colleagues and I will work to stop this bill from becoming law.

Members of the House Progressive Caucus have vowed to fight to keep this public option in any final legislation that emerges, along with other provisions they say are needed to protect lower and middle-income Americans and hold insurance companies accountable.

In a statement, the Democratic chairmen of three key House committees said while there are clear differences between House and Senate bills, both will bring fundamental health care coverage to millions who are currently uninsured.

Obama administration officials have been quoted as saying they anticipate negotiations on a final bill would not be complete until after the President’s State of the Union Address in January, and could slip even later into the new year.

If passed, this will be the most important piece of social policy since the Social Security Act in the 1930s, and the most important reform of our health care system since Medicare passed in the 1960s.

President Obama issued a statement to the press in the State Dining Room in the White House saying that the vote is “legislation that brings us toward the end of a nearly century-long struggle to reform America’s health care system.”

He also pointed out the bill’s strengths, noting, “The reform bill that passed the Senate this morning, like the House bill, includes the toughest measures ever taken to hold the insurance industry accountable. Insurance companies will no longer be able to deny you coverage on the basis of a preexisting condition. They will no longer be able to drop your coverage when you get sick. No longer will you have to pay unlimited amounts out of your own pocket for the treatments you need. And you’ll be able to appeal unfair decisions by insurance companies to an independent party.”

He also noted how historic the bill is, saying, “If passed, this will be the most important piece of social policy since the Social Security Act in the 1930s, and the most important reform of our health care system since Medicare passed in the 1960s.”

Obama noted the potential social impact, saying, “It’s the impact reform will have on Americans who no longer have to go without a checkup or prescriptions that they need because they can’t afford them; on families who no longer have to worry that a single illness will send them into financial ruin; and on businesses that will no longer face exorbitant insurance rates that hamper their competitiveness.”

Obama afterwards made phone calls to various Senators and other people, including Victoria Kennedy and David Turner of Little Rock, Arkansas. Mr. Turner had his health insurance rescinded in January of last year, after his insurance company went back into his record and alleged that he failed to disclose his full medical record at the time he applied for coverage. Turner was First Lady Michelle Obama’s guest during her husband’s speech to a joint session of Congress on health care reform back in September.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=U.S._Senate_passes_landmark_health_care_reform_bill&oldid=4384266”

Looted, possibly contaminated body parts transplanted into USA, Canadian patients

Monday, March 20, 2006

Fears of contaminated bone and skin grafts are being felt by unsuspecting patients following the revelation that funeral homes may have been looting corpses.

Janet Evans of Marion, Ohio was told by her surgeon, “The bone grafts you got might have been contaminated”. She reacted with shock, “I was flabbergasted because I didn’t even know what he was talking about. I didn’t know I got a bone graft until I got this call. I just thought they put in screws and rods.”

The body of Alistair Cooke, the former host of Masterpiece Theatre, was supposedly looted along with more than 1,000 others, according to two law enforcement officials close to the case. The tissue taken was typically skin, bone and tendon, which was then sold for use in procedures such as dental implants and hip replacements. According to authorities, millions of dollars were made by selling the body parts to companies for use in operations done at hospitals and clinics in the United States and Canada.

A New Jersey company, Biomedical Tissue Services, has reportedly been taking body parts from funeral homes across Brooklyn, New York. According to ABC News, they set up rooms like a “surgical suite.” After they took the bones, they replaced them with PVC pipe. This was purportedly done by stealth, without approval of the deceased person or the next of kin. 1,077 bodies were involved, say prosecutors.

Investagators say a former dentist, Michael Mastromarino, is behind the operation. Biomedical was considered one of the “hottest procurement companies in the country,” raking in close to $5 million. Eventually, people became worried: “Can the donors be trusted?” A tissue processing company called LifeCell answered no, and issued a recall on all their tissue.

Cooke’s daughter, Susan Cooke Kittredge, said, “To know his bones were sold was one thing, but to see him standing truncated before me is another entirely.” Now thousands of people around the country are receiving letters warning that they should be tested for infectious diseases like HIV or hepatitis. On February 23, the Brooklyn District Attorney indicted Mastromarino and three others. They are charged with 122 felony counts, including forgery and bodysnatching.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Looted,_possibly_contaminated_body_parts_transplanted_into_USA,_Canadian_patients&oldid=4673663”

Man&Amp;Machine Consulting}

Man&Machine Consulting

by

manmachine

Leider ist der Eintrag nur auf Amerikanisches Englisch verfgbar. Der Inhalt wird unten in einer verfgbaren Sprache angezeigt. Klicken Sie auf den Link, um die aktuelle Sprache zu ndern.

Machine Learning is the most important field of artificial intelligence nowadays and it will soon be ubiquitously used where a reasonably large amount of data is available. For starters, Machine Learning is the use of algorithms that learn from data and make informed predictions and decisions without being explicitly programmed. It can be simply any data that belongs to the context of the desired use case.

Applications are already in everyday lives. The recommenders on Netflix, YouTube or Amazon that are able to determine correctly (at least often) what you want to view or buy. The home assistants like Amazon Echo or Google Home that can plan your day or play some slow music when youre emotionally down.

Dont expect quality insights out of poor data (aka garbage in, garbage out)

Machine Learning applications depend on the relevance and quality of the data that is analyzed by the algorithms. If the data is inaccurate or irrelevant, the predictions and decisions made will be off the mark:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bga8JcK6KDA[/youtube]

If you access YouTube using your friends laptop, the recommendation will still give your friends playlist unless you sign in

In order to detect fraud, it is paramount that the historical data used is about correct transactions. If fraud data is the norm, the decision made will be incorrect

Think about a machine learning software that is used to provide the best possible pay for employees. Data showing some employees earning more than the CEO should be filtered out first

Dont expect something that isnt there

For successful operation of a Machine Learning application, the dataset has to be huge enough to make any kind of intelligent prediction. For instance, in home assistant software, the data collected in one week may not provide enough characteristics of the user to provide decisions. The assistant has to learn over several months to understand the repetitive patterns of the user and use that knowledge to predict what the user might need in the coming days.

Another limitation of Machine Learning is that it can only make predictions based on the available data. It can never make up something that the data have not alluded. In a smart program advising farmers on the most convenient crops to plant in a certain area, the program cannot provide any conclusive prediction if the historical data of the climatic conditions and soil type is unavailable.

Dont expect there will be no hard work

Building a quality machine learning application is generally a complex task but there is one aspect that is the most underestimated: Data preparation. Data may be presented in various forms. Some may be structured (like databases or Excel sheets). Other forms may be more or less unstructured (like logfiles, documents or images).

Necessary tasks are e.g. formatting, cleaning and sampling. In formatting, the available data is converted into the required format. The data might be required in a single flat file while the available data may be in several database tables. Or date fields might be in MM/DD/YY format but you need the day of week. Cleaning involves fixing of missing data and removal of redundant and unrelated data. Sampling involves using a small subset of a large amount of data because running the algorithms over the whole dataset is uneconomical and might take a lot of time.

Expect tangible results (if everything is done right)

In a business setup, the use of Machine Learning in various aspects can provide a huge boost:

Management can use data to predict the expected rate of growth in the coming months, e.g. to increase inventories or staff

The finance department can employ Machine Learning techniques to track the number of sales and spot anomalies

The marketing department can use campaign results data to fine-tune their segmentation and generate the next best offer for a client

Digital Transformation

Article Source:

eArticlesOnline.com}

New Zealand Reserve Bank phone hacker not convicted

Thursday, September 28, 2006

Gerasimos Macridis, 39-years-old, left the court room discharged without conviction after hacking into the New Zealand Reserve Bank’s phone system and then asking for money for his services after pointing out these security flaws to both the Reserve Bank and Telecom New Zealand in May, 2006, and offering to fix them. He had identified himself as a security consultant.

The New Zealand Police then raided his home and took his computer on 21 September. Macridis told police that he did not think it was illegal, but knew he was not authorised to access the phone systems. Telecom then took him to court.

Colin McGilicray, police prosecutor, said: “Macridis has a significant number of previous fraud convictions and it appeared he was trying to obtain money through virtue of his technical knowledge.”

Macridis, who represented himself, told the court that for 11-years he had worked as a casual security consultant and he had worked for Telecom, police and Department of Internal Affairs.

Macridis thought himself as an honest, law abiding citizen as his 1994 conviction had ‘turned his life around’.

Judge Ian Mill said this case was very unusual and also noted that Macridis ended his offending over 10-years ago.

Mill said: “Macridis used his talents to identify security risks and he had identified a grave risk to the Reserve Bank and its customers. Macridis provided a report of his findings, requested payment albeit without a contract and for his troubles was prosecuted. He did not pass the information on to others and did not use it for personal gain.”

“In my view his intentions were honourable,” Mill added.

Mill discharged him without conviction on the basis that a conviction would be out of proportion with his actions.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=New_Zealand_Reserve_Bank_phone_hacker_not_convicted&oldid=438654”