Microsoft to send Bing to school this year

Microsoft to send Bing to school this year
A special version of Bing will be offered to schools later this year
-- one that promises no ads, no adult content, and special learning
features.
Bing may enroll at your local school by the end of the year.
Microsoft is developing a special edition of its Bing search engine
geared specifically toward students from kindergarten through 12th
grade. Known as Bing for Schools, the tailored version will remove all
ads from search results, filter out adult content, beef up privacy
protection, and add learning features to promote digital literacy,
Microsoft said in a blog posted Monday.
This new version will be free and entirely voluntary for any
interested schools. No special software or unique Web address will be
required to access the site.
To promote digital learning, the Bing for Schools homepage will offer
students hotspots to help them investigate and explore new topics.
Short lesson plans will be on hand to encourage them to use Bing to
find answers to different questions.
Those who want to learn more can register at the Bing for Schools Web
site. Microsoft promises information and updates on how schools can
take advantage of the program.
Obviously, Microsoft wants to expand the reach of Bing. But a
student-friendly version without some of the pitfalls of the regular
search engine could earn good grades among teachers, school officials,
and parents.
"We see the program as something we can build alongside teachers,
parents, and visionaries to create the best possible search experience
for our children, and will continue to update you with new information
as we work towards our launch later this year," Microsoft said in its
blog.
For More Info vist Here : http://news.cnet.com/

Read More

Bobby 'Blue' Bland, soul and blues singer, dies at 83

Bobby 'Blue' Bland, soul and blues singer, dies at 83
Bobby "Blue" Bland, the blues and soul singer whose most memorable
songs included Further On Up the Road and Turn On Your Love Light, has
died.

The 83-year-old died on Sunday at home in Memphis, Tennessee,
surrounded by his relatives, after complications from an ongoing
illness, his son Rodd said.

Known as "the Sinatra of the blues", Bland was influenced by Nat King
Cole's smooth vocals and lavish arrangements.

The singer was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1992.

The hall of fame described him as "second in stature only to BB King
as a product of Memphis's Beale Street blues scene".

"He brought a certain level of class to the blues genre,'' said
Lawrence "Boo" Mitchell, son of veteran musician and producer Willie
Mitchell, who worked with stars including Al Green.

"He's always been the type of guy that if he could help you in any
way, form or fashion, he would,'' Rodd Bland added.

The singer, who at one stage in his life worked as BB King's valet and
chauffeur, was born in Rosemark, Tennessee, before moving as a
teenager to nearby Memphis.

There, he was a founding member of the Beale Streeters, a loose-knit
blues outfit that also included BB King and Johnny Ace.

Hall of Fame
He recorded in the early 50s with Sam Phillips, who also discovered
Elvis Presley, at Sun Records - but it was not until several years
later, following a stint in the army, that Bland found success.

His first number one in the R&B charts was Further On Up The Road in
1957, followed by I'll Take Care Of You in 1960 and a string of other
R&B hits including Turn On Your Love Light in 1961.
In the same year he recorded I Pity the Fool, which was later picked
up by singers including David Bowie and Eric Clapton, who also made
Further On Up the Road part of his repertoire.

Unlike many stars of the time, he played no instrument, relying solely
on his raw, gospel-toned vocals to propel the music. That fusion of
soul and blues, memorably highlighted on the 1961 album Two Steps From
The Blues, paved the way for the likes of Stax and Muscle Shoals later
in the decade.

Rolling Stone magazine named the album one of its 500 most influential
of all time, noting that Bland's performance on the songs I Pity the
Fool and Lead Me On "may just be some of the purest, most heartbroken
singing you'll ever hear".

The singer's style mellowed over the years, although a couple of
albums with his old collaborator King in the 1970s kept his profile,
and sex symbol status, high.

Although his output waned in later life, his legacy was kept alive by
hip-hop artists such as Jay-Z, who sampled his song Ain't No Love In
The Heart of the City,

For More Info vist Here : http://www.bbc.co.uk/

Read More

Friedman’s Sexual-Abuse Conviction Was Justified, Report Says

Friedman's Sexual-Abuse Conviction Was Justified, Report Says
Jesse Friedman, the Great Neck, N.Y., teenager whose role in a sexual
abuse case a quarter-century ago was portrayed in the Oscar-nominated
documentary "Capturing the Friedmans," and came to symbolize an era of
sensational, often-suspect accusations of child molestation, was
properly convicted and should not have his status as a sexual predator
overturned, according to a three-year review that was released on
Monday.
In a 155-page report written with very little ambiguity, the Nassau
County district attorney, Kathleen M. Rice, concluded that none of
four issues raised in a strongly worded 2010 ruling by the United
States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit were substantiated by
the evidence.

Instead, it concluded, "By any impartial analysis, the reinvestigation
process prompted by Jesse Friedman, his advocates and the Second
Circuit, has only increased confidence in the integrity of Jesse
Friedman's guilty plea and adjudication as a sex offender."

The review concludes another chapter in a case that came to national
attention after the 2003 release of the film, which portrayed both the
breakup of a deeply troubled family and what was characterized as a
flawed, biased police investigation and judicial process. The case led
to guilty pleas in 1988 by Jesse Friedman, then 18, and his father,
Arnold Friedman, who ran a popular computer class at his house on
Piccadilly Road in the affluent Long Island community of Great Neck.

The report's conclusion was not entirely unexpected, even by Mr.
Friedman and his advocates, given the explosive nature of the charges,
the impossibility of a definitive finding on many of the allegations
more than 25 years in the past and the high bar for prosecutors to
overturn convictions, especially those based on confessions.

So the documentary's director, Andrew Jarecki, though cautiously
optimistic about a ruling favoring Mr. Friedman, who served 13 years
in prison before being released in December 2001, said before the
report came out that a ruling in Mr. Friedman's favor faced stiff head
winds.

"Old habits die hard, particularly when you have a crime like this,"
he said. "This is a radioactive crime. If there's one chance in a
million that it might have happened, the standard rules don't apply."

In an e-mail to supporters before the release of the decision, Mr.
Jarecki said that an unfavorable ruling by the district attorney would
be a "distraction," and that Mr. Friedman would continue with an
appeal. Mr. Friedman's lawyer, Ron Kuby, said that the district
attorney's office had fought Mr. Friedman's efforts at every turn and
that this was just more of the same.

"My immediate reaction is that we have spent three long years in a
pointless waste of time waiting for D.A. Rice to issue this report,"
Mr. Kuby said after learning of the decision but before reading the
report. "Fortunately, the conclusion of this bogus reinvestigation
clears the way for the Friedman team to return to court based upon the
new evidence we've collected as well as the increasing likelihood of
obtaining the original case documents."

The review led to evidence both supporting the conviction and
overturning it. Perhaps most powerful for the latter was a detailed
and chilling statement the defense obtained from Ross Goldstein, a
high school friend of Jesse Friedman, who was the only person other
than the Friedmans convicted in the case. Mr. Goldstein said his
confession was a lie coerced by intimidating police conduct and the
threats of a draconian sentence.

In its 2010 decision, the Second Circuit reluctantly upheld the
verdict on technical grounds but harshly criticized the trial judge,
prosecutors and detectives in the case, and suggested that it should
be reopened.

Yet Ms. Rice's report, in all instances, found that the preponderance
of evidence pointed toward upholding the conviction. And her report
comes with an unusual and potentially critical seal of approval in a
case that is also being played out in the court of public opinion.

When she began her review, she appointed a four-member independent
advisory panel to guide and oversee the work. It included Barry
Scheck, a founder of the Innocence Project and one of the country's
leading advocates for overturning wrongful convictions.

The report was prefaced by a four-page statement by the panel. It
commended the investigation, said it was done without bias and said
that if the evidence had pointed that way, "we have no doubt the
Review Team was prepared to recommend without reservation that
Friedman's conviction be overturned."

The statement, signed by all four members, said it was not the role of
the panel to make an ultimate judgment about Jesse Friedman's guilt,
but added: "We do have an obligation to express a view as to whether
we believe the conclusions expressed in the Review Team's report are
reasonable and supported by the evidence it cites. We think they are."

The report centered on four points raised in the film and by the
appeals court — that the case might have been tainted by repeated
police interviews that pushed children toward confessions, that
children might have been hypnotized to recover memories not based on
fact, that the case was distorted by a "moral panic" that created
false accusations and a predisposition toward conviction and that
Jesse Friedman's guilty plea might have been unlawfully coerced by the
police, prosecutors and a hostile judge.

The review rejected them all. It said that, though some interviews in
the late stages of the case might have been flawed, the rapid pace and
early flow of accusations from children in the classes indicated that
the allegations arose from spontaneous accounts, not from
investigators pushing children toward accusations. It said the first
child interviewed reported improper behavior, 12 children levied
accusations of illegal sexual behavior at Arnold Friedman in the
investigation's first two weeks and, five weeks into the
investigation, 13 boys described criminal behavior by Jesse Friedman.

It said, that despite one student's account in "Capturing the
Friedmans" of making allegations after being hypnotized, any use of
group therapy or hypnosis came after all the indictments were filed.
It disputed the one account of hypnosis in the film.

The review said the Friedman case was "in no way similar" to other
notorious cases of its time, like the McMartin preschool case, which
produced allegations of Satanic ritual abuse of children but ended
with no convictions. The review said that the children in this case
were twice as old as in that one and that many victims complained of
abuse early rather than through months of questioning.

And it said Jesse Friedman had competent legal representation, weighed
his options intelligently and pleaded guilty after determining it was
"the optimal strategy" in light of the available choices.

It cited other evidence damaging to Mr. Friedman's case — students and
parents who stuck by their accounts and added fuller details, a
psychiatric evaluation conducted for Jesse Friedman's defense that
labeled him "a psychopathic deviant" and an appearance before the
review team by Arnold Friedman's brother, Howard Friedman, in which,
according to the report, he said: "Jesse is guilty and you're going to
ask me how I know. Because Arnold told me." He said that Arnold
Friedman had confessed that both he and his son had "misbehaved" with
children in the class, but it is not clear from his statements what
that misbehavior entailed.

Still, the panel and review team cited the enormous difficulty in
getting to the truth because of the passage of time, incomplete and
shoddy record keeping and faded memories. The panel noted that
participation was entirely voluntary, so only some of those involved
in the case took part in the investigation. And many of the characters
in the case gave different accounts at different times, making
evaluation difficult, the investigators said.

Most glaring of the conflicting accounts was the one given by Mr.
Goldstein, who said that "every single thing" in his grand jury
testimony had been a lie and that he had been "coached, rehearsed and
directed" by a prosecutor and a detective to tell the story they
wanted, which was devastating for Jesse Friedman's defense. The review
said his recantation was unreliable.

And both the review team and the panel made a few similar judgments
about Mr. Jarecki's film.

"The Review Team committed itself to follow the facts wherever they
might lead," the report said, "and found that the whole truth diverged
significantly from the edited version of events portrayed in the
film."
For More Info vist Here : http://www.nytimes.com/

Read More

Court calls for tougher scrutiny of affirmative action

Court calls for tougher scrutiny of affirmative action
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court drew new limits on colleges' use of
affirmative action on Monday, saying that although racial preferences
remain constitutional, they are permissible only if schools can first
show that there are "no workable race-neutral alternatives."

The 7-1 decision written by Justice Anthony Kennedy is likely to
subject schools' affirmative action programs to far tougher scrutiny
in the future because schools will be required to show that they have
no other way to create a diverse student body. The court stopped short
of issuing a broader ruling either cementing or eliminating schools'
ability to take account of an applicant's race when deciding who to
admit.
Instead, Kennedy said that affirmative action remains permissible, but
only if the University of Texas at Austin could prove that there was
"no workable race-neutral alternatives would produce the benefits of
educational diversity."

The justices declined on Monday to decide whether the university's
program met that standard. Instead, they said that a lower federal
court had acted too deferentially by, in essence, taking the
university's word for the fact that such preferences were necessary.
They instructed the lower court to hear the case again, and this time
to require the university to prove that it had no other way to
assemble a diverse student body.

"The University must prove that the means chosen by the University to
attain diversity are narrowly tailored to that goal. On this point,
the University receives no deference," Kennedy wrote.

Kennedy was joined by the court's four conservatives and two of the
court's liberals, justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor. Justice
Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote a short dissent, saying the lower court
already had enough evidence. Justice Elena Kagan did not participate
in the case.

Justice Clarence Thomas, the court's only African-American judge,
wrote a separate opinion saying that he was prepared to go further and
declare that "use of race in higher education admissions decisions is
categorically prohibited" by the Equal Protection Clause.

A decision calling into question the continued use of race in college
admissions had been widely anticipated in light of the court's ruling
in 2003 narrowly upholding the University of Michigan's use of racial
preferences. At that time, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said such
programs should be obsolete within 25 years; O'Connor, who had since
left the court, was on hand when Kennedy announced Monday's decision.

A decision calling into question the continued use of race in college
admissions had been widely anticipated in light of the court's ruling
in 2003 narrowly upholding the University of Michigan's use of racial
preferences. At that time, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said such
programs should be obsolete within 25 years.

Abigail Fisher didn't wait that long. Denied admission to the
University of Texas in 2008, she claimed her only fault was being
white. "I didn't take this sitting down," Fisher said before oral
arguments last October.

"There were people in my class with lower grades who weren't in all
the activities I was in who were being accepted into UT, and the only
other difference between us was the color of our skin," she said in a
video posted by the Project on Fair Representation, a conservative
group that solicited her case. "For an institution of higher learning
to act this way makes no sense to me."

The university's policy was to accept the top 10% of students from
each Texas high school, which because of housing patterns produced a
relatively diverse class. It then filled out its freshman class by
assessing a number of factors including race – a system it said was
devoid of quotas or numerical targets but was designed to achieve what
it called "critical mass."

The school — backed by others that use affirmative action programs to
increase the percentage of minorities gaining admission — argued that
a diverse student body contributes to a well-rounded educational
experience for all.

It was supported by 73 "friend of the court" briefs filed by a broad
array of universities, student groups and athletics coaches, as well
as federal, state and local government officials, business executives
and retired military leaders. They argued that diversity in education
is needed to assure a steady stream of qualified minority applicants
for public service, private enterprise and the armed forces.

Though the court upheld the University of Michigan law school's
affirmative action program in 2003, it struck down the undergraduate
school's program and cautioned that the days of racial preferences
should be numbered. It has since accepted for its next term the state
of Michigan's defense of its constitutional amendment barring racial
preferences in education, employment and contracting.

Since the 2003 decision, the court has taken a turn to the right,
thanks to Justice Samuel Alito replacing Sandra Day O'Connor. By the
time the Texas case was argued in October, five justices were on
record opposing racial preferences.

For that reason, college administrators and civil rights groups feared
that the court could issue a sweeping declaration against such
preferences affecting not only public universities but possibly
private schools, such as Harvard and Yale, that receive federal funds.

The case hearkened back to 1950, when Heman Sweatt sued the university
after being denied admission because he was black. As his attorney,
Sweatt chose Thurgood Marshall, who would go on to become the high
court's first black justice. He won the case, marking the first time
the court had ordered a black student admitted to an all-white
institution.

Since then, colleges and universities have become more integrated. In
Grutter v. Bollinger, the court's 5-4 decision upholding the Michigan
law school's limited use of affirmative action, O'Connor predicted,
"The court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial
preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest
approved today."

That case wasn't a slam dunk for the civil rights movement. At the
same time, the court ruled 6-3 against the undergraduate school's more
numerical system of racial preferences. And O'Connor's decision
upholding the law school's racial preferences included a dissent from
Kennedy, now the swing vote on the court.

"Preferment by race, when resorted to by the state, can be the most
divisive of all policies, containing within it the potential to
destroy confidence in the Constitution and in the idea of equality,"
Kennedy said then.

Four years later, in a decision that barred voluntary integration
programs in the Seattle and Louisville public schools, Chief Justice
John Roberts issued one of his most oft-quoted lines: "The way to stop
discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the
basis of race."

Two other members of the court were being watched closely in this
case: Justice Thomas, the lone black justice, who has written that his
Yale Law School degree was devalued by racial preferences; and Justice
Sonia Sotomayor, the lone Hispanic, whose recent book, My Beloved
World, credits affirmative action for giving her access to Princeton
and Yale.
For More Info vist Here :http://www.usatoday.com/

Read More

Transgender Girl Banned From Bathroom Wins Case

Transgender Girl Banned From Bathroom Wins Case
Coy Mathis, a 6-year-old transgender girl who was banned from her
first-grade bathroom, has won a statewide legal case in Colorado that
might have far-reaching implications for the rest of the nation in
protecting the rights of transgender children.

Coy, born a triplet, had been home schooled since last December, when
school officials told her parents that she could no longer use the
female facilities and ordered her to use the boys' or nurse's
bathroom.

Her parents, Jeremy and Kathryn Mathis, with the help of the
Transgender Legal and Defense Education Fund (TLDEF), filed a
complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Division on behalf of Coy,
alleging that the school has violated her rights.

"This is amazing because it is not just a win for Coy, but a win for
every transgender child in the entire state," her mother, Kathryn
Mathis, told ABCNews.com today. "It's amazing for all of them and
their future. It lets them be who they are. They don't have to spend
their childhood being discriminated against."
According to TLDEF, this is the "most comprehensive" ruling ever
supporting the rights of transgender people to access bathrooms
"without harassment or discrimination." This is the first ruling in
the nation holding that transgender students must be allowed to use
bathrooms that match who they are, and the most comprehensive ruling
ever supporting the rights of transgender people to access bathrooms
without harassment or discrimination, TLDEF said.
Coy was labeled male at birth, but has always known that she is a
girl, which she has expressed since she was 18 months old. Since
kindergarten, Coy had worn girls' clothing to school. Her classmates
and teachers used female pronouns to refer to her, and she used the
girls' bathrooms, just like any other girl in her school.

In mid-December 2012, the Fountain-Fort Carson School District 8
informed Coy's parents that Coy would be prevented from using the
girls' bathrooms after winter break. The district ordered Coy to use
the boys' bathroom, a staff bathroom, or the nurse's bathroom.

Coy's parents removed her from school and filed a Complaint with the
Colorado Civil Rights Division on Coy's behalf in February, 2013.
According to her parents, Coy has behaved like a girl since she was 18
months old. When her brother Max was consumed with dinosaurs, she was
playing with Barbie dolls. By 4, she was telling her mother that
something was wrong with her body.

While enrolled at Eagle Elementary School in Fountain, Colo., the
6-year-old presented as female and wore girls' clothing. Her
classmates and teachers used female pronouns to refer to her, and she
has used the girls' bathrooms.

The Mathis' have a set of triplets and two other children, Dakota, 8,
and Auri, 2. The father, Jeremy Mathis, 31, is a former Marine who was
honorably discharged with injuries. Kathryn Mathis, 27, is a certified
nurse assistant and takes care of Coy's triplet, Lily who has been
severely disabled since a viral infection after birth. She must be fed
through an IV and is quadriplegic.

When Coy began complaining about "something wrong" with her body, her
parents took her to a specialist, who diagnosed gender identity
disorder. Doctors recommended no immediate medical intervention but to
let her "live as a girl," he explained. "They spoke to the school and
they said, 'fine.'"

Since kindergarten, Coy has presented as female. Some of the school's
bathrooms had no gender designation, but for those that did, she used
the girls' facilities.

Because Coy is so young, medical experts have advised that she not
undergo hormone therapy with an eye to surgery until she is in her
teens.

"We have spoken to various doctors to prepare for what is ahead and
they all say the same thing," said Mathis.

As for Coy, her mother said the little girl "does not get the enormity
of what the ruling means."

"She gets what he it means for her," said Mathis. "We told her the
lawyer was fight for us and the state has agreed with us. She was
completely ecstatic. Her eyes bugged out and she jumped up and down:
'I can go back to school and make new friends.'"
At the time, Coy's school district said, it had "acted reasonably and
fairly with respect to this issue," it said. "However [it] believes
the appropriate and proper forum for discussing the issues identified
in the charge is through the Division of Civil Rights process."

In December the school lawyers sent a letter to TLDEF that said: "The
district's decision took into account not only Coy but other students
in the building, their parents, and the future impact a boy with male
genitals using a girls' bathroom would have as Coy grew older."

While other students and teachers do not notice that Coy has male
genitals, the school said it feared as the child developed parents and
students would become "uncomfortable."
"...It would be far more psychologically damaging and disruptive for
the issue to arise at an age when students deal with social issues,"
the letter said.

Across the nation, schools are paying more attention to transgender
issues, but there is little uniformity.

The Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act prohibits discrimination against
transgender students in public schools.

A report by the National Center for Transgender Equality and the
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force paints a bleak picture of life as
a transgender person in the United States. The 2011 survey, "Injustice
at Every Turn," found that discrimination is pervasive in "nearly
every system and institution."
For More Info vist Here :http://abcnews.go.com/

Read More

Texas House Republicans pass abortion law

Texas House Republicans pass abortion law
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Republicans in the Texas House have passed one of
the nation's toughest packages of abortion restrictions.

Democrats stalled the vote as long as possible Monday, the second to
last day of the special legislative session.

The proposed bill would ban abortions after the 20th week of
pregnancy, require doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby
hospitals and limit abortions to surgical centers.

Supporters say the bill would improve women's health care. Opponents
warn it would shut down 37 out of 42 abortion clinics in the state.

The bill must sit for 24 hours, and then the Senate will need to vote.

Democrats have threatened a filibuster to stop the bill from reaching
Gov. Rick Perry's desk.
For More Info vist Here : http://www.boston.com/

Read More

US Supreme Court agrees to hear challenge to Mass

US Supreme Court agrees to hear challenge to Mass. abortion clinic
buffer zone law
The US Supreme Court has agreed to consider a challenge to the
Massachusetts abortion clinic buffer zone law.

The Supreme Court issued an order today granting a writ of certiorari
to the petitioners, who are objecting to the law that keeps abortion
protesters a set distance away from abortion clinics.

The high court's action comes after a federal appeals court in January
upheld the law, saying it protected the rights of patients while, at
the same time, allowing others to express their opinions.

The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit said in its ruling, "Few
subjects have proven more controversial in modern times than the issue
of abortion. ... The nation is sharply divided about the morality of
the practice and its place in a caring society. But the right of the
state to take reasonable steps to ensure the safe passage of persons
wishing to enter health care facilities cannot seriously be
questioned.

"The Massachusetts statute at issue here is a content-neutral,
narrowly tailored time-place-manner regulation that protects the
rights of prospective patients and clinic employees without offending
the First Amendment rights of others," said the opinion, written by
Judge Bruce M. Selya, who heard the case, along with two other judges.

The appeals court ruling affirmed a decision by US District Judge
Joseph L. Tauro in February 2012.

The law creates a 35-foot fixed buffer zone around the driveways and
entrances of clinics. The lawsuit, Eleanor McCullen et al v. Martha
Coakley et al, was brought by seven people who say they regularly
engaged in antiabortion counseling outside the three clinics.

The challenge to the law was the latest in a series. "This case does
not come to us as a stranger," the appeals court said, leading off its
decision.

The court twice upheld an earlier version of the law, in 2001 and
2004. After the Legislature revised the law in 2007, the appeals court
upheld it again in 2009. More challenges were launched in Tauro's
court. Tauro rejected them, but the plaintiffs appealed.

Massachusetts began moving toward a buffer zone law after the slayings
of two clinic workers in Brookline in 1994 shocked the nation. John C.
Salvi III, a 22-year-old abortion opponent, shot two clinic workers to
death and wounded several others. Salvi later committed suicide in
prison while serving two life sentences.
For More Info vist Here : http://www.boston.com/

Read More