No account yet?
Subscription Options
Subscribe via RSS, or
Free Email Alert

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail alert with links to Dallas Blog posts.

New Site Search
Bill DeOre
Click for Larger Image
Dallas Sports Blog
Local Team Sports News
The Official Site of the Dallas Mavericks
TEX Homepage News
Stars Recent Headlines
Good News Dallas
Texas Medical Center Leaders Have a Heart for Veterans Print E-mail
by Tom Pauken    Fri, Nov 9, 2012, 08:53 AM

On November 15, job fairs targeting veterans will be held across the state of Texas. Twenty-seven different locations will be hosting events as part of the Hiring Red, White & You! statewide job fair. That day will be the culmination of a joint effort among several state agencies, private employers, and countless staffers. But, it would not have been possible without the hard work of three unassuming men who have a heart for veterans.


Leaders at the Texas Medical Center (TMC) in Houston made it a goal to help our returning veterans make the transition to civilian life and in the process it has become a statewide model for helping veterans find jobs. TMC’s President and Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Richard Wainerdi, helped set up a task force from the TMC’s member institutions on military hiring. Joining Dr. Wainerdi were Dr. James H. “Red” Duke and Dr. John Holcomb. Both Dick Wainerdi and Red Duke served in the Korean War. John Holcomb is a veteran of the Iraq War.


These three men knew that many veterans possess skills and experience needed in the healthcare field and wanted to do a better job of tapping that talent. The task force examined the job recruitment process, looked for new ways to reach out to veterans, and worked to find ways to translate military skills and training into civilian course credit. As a result, TMC and its member institutions have integrated support for our military into their corporate cultures.


The task force – entitled Hiring Red White and You! – was so successful that Governor Perry, the Texas Workforce Commission, and the Texas Veterans Commission have partnered with TMC to build on their success by sponsoring job fairs under the same title in cities all over Texas.


As a Texas Workforce Commissioner, I was proud to present the Texas Medical Center with our office’s Texas Veterans Employer Award last month for the organization’s outstanding work in this area. Employers can learn a lot from TMC. Here are some of the key ways TMC created a veteran-friendly culture:

• Understand the military. Many skills taught in the military translate well in the civilian world. But sometimes the military uses its own terms and titles to describe such skills. TMC updated its resume-scanning programs to recognize military equivalents to civilian job requirements.

• Words matter. One of the most important things an employer can do is state that it is military-friendly and encourages veterans to apply.

• Working together is also important. One of the things that really impressed me about TMC’s approach is the way the member institutions are helping each other. It’s not uncommon for one institution to refer a veteran to another institution.


TMC works with many veterans organizations, including the Texas Veterans Leadership Program (TVLP). Sadly, the unemployment rate for our returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan exceeds the general unemployment rate. At the Texas Workforce Commission, we created the TVLP, run by veterans who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, to help their fellow veterans make a successful transition to civilian life. It was modeled on a program I initiated in the Reagan Administration called the Vietnam Veterans Leadership Program to help our returning Vietnam Veterans.


Speaking of President Reagan, he had a sign on his desk at the White House which read: “There is no limit to what a man can do or where he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit.” He governed with that adage in mind. As CEO of TMC, Dr. Wainerdi sure has exemplified that principle in his unassuming leadership on behalf of our returning veterans.

I encourage employers across the state of Texas to turn out November 15 for the statewide job fairs for veterans. For more information visit or email This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it


Tom Pauken is the Commissioner Representing Employers at the Texas Workforce Commission and author of Bringing America Home.

Share This Story on Facebook
I Hate to Say This, But I Agreed with Him! Print E-mail
by James Reza    Fri, Nov 2, 2012, 03:39 PM

           In 1960 I cast my first vote for a United States President.  I remember paying my Poll Tax ($1.75 tax that allowed one to vote) and the white guys at work made fun of me by telling me, “Well James, you’re now a full fledge Mexican American!  Without a Poll Tax you’re just a plain old Mexican!”  Not offended by my white co-workers comments we all had a good laugh.

            Aside from the racial comments made by my white co-workers some soon became upset with me when I told them I was going to vote for Senator John F. Kennedy, a Catholic.  Some responded, “James, the Pope is going to be running the United States if this clown (JFK) gets elected!  We don’t want any high official of the Catholic Church running our country!”  My only response to them was that I, with my vote, wanted to prove that a Catholic without any interference from the Catholic Church hierarchy could govern our country.

            It had had been 32 years since JFK; a Catholic had made a run for the presidency.  In 1928, Al Smith, a Catholic and a Democrat, lost to Herbert Hoover, a Republican!  In the end, the Republicans were identified with the booming economy of the 1920s, whereas Al Smith, a Roman Catholic, suffered politically from Anti-Catholic prejudice which was associated with Hoover winning by a landslide victory.  Hoover’s victory was short lived when the Great Depression occurred during his watch.  From that point forward the Depression made it very difficult for a Republican to occupy the White House for many years.  Thus, Democrats came into power in 1933 under the leadership of President Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) who to my knowledge held the presidency for 3 terms (1933-1945).  Though the United States had not recovered totally from the Great Depression under President Roosevelt, World War II quickly grew the economy out of the Depression with the help of the war machinery industry, which helped tremendously to put many people back to work.

            Besides hearing negative comments about me voting for a Catholic in 1960, I also heard many unsavory comments hurled at the Republican candidate, former Vice President Richard M. Nixon, for President Dwight Eisenhower.  Unbeknown to many, President Eisenhower was despised by many segregationists like Arkansas Gov. Orval Faubus, a Democrat, for allowing black students to enroll in white public schools and colleges in 1957.  Gov Faubus intervened by sending the National Guard to stop the integration of Arkansas schools.  However, few blacks and others are unaware that President Eisenhower sent United States Army troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect black children who enrolled in previously all white public schools from harassment and physical harm from anti black racists and the Klan.  I vividly recall anti Nixon slurs like, “I’m not voting for no N-loving Republican!”  So here you have it folks, Texas Democrats not knowing whether to vote for a N-loving Republican or a Catholic!  By the slimiest popular vote ever (34,220,984 JFK — 34,109,157 Nixon) the Catholic Democrat beat the supposed black loving Republican.  JFK by the way carried Texas, which was then a Democrat stronghold state.

            Needless to say, my initial exposure in voting for a President was an eye opener for me, which left a lasting impression that sort of shaped my political philosophy.  “How so James?” some might ask.  Well folks, as a Hispanic, I endured the discrimination many blacks underwent along with Hispanics during those troubling times.  To be quiet honest, I should have voted for Nixon instead of JFK being of the terrible discrimination Hispanics endured in those years. But, my desire for a Catholic to lead our nation made me side with the Democrat Catholic candidate.

            Living in a predominately Hispanic and Democrat stronghold in North Fort Worth I often was asked by those seeking political office for my help due to my involvements in my Catholic parish, as a newspaper writer and fund raiser.  Often, I would help those Hispanic Democrats who were well educated and had a genuine interest to improve our Hispanic community.  I never helped those individuals who were affiliated with radical Hispanic groups or were community activists.  Again, I’d make political enemies with those, though Democrats, who were against those I supported.  As the old saying goes, “I couldn’t win for losing!”

            In the 1980s I openly supported President Ronald Reagan, much to the disgust of my Hispanic neighbors and supposedly friends.  And when President Reagan cleaned President Carter’s clock that infuriated my Hispanic neighbors even more.  When President Reagan won his second term, the hatred by Hispanics towards me became more intense, but I welcomed it and often challenged those who disagreed with me much to their disgust.  My answer was simple, “This is America and you and I can vote for whoever the hell we want!”

            By now, some of you are wondering why I rendered this account of my voting experience with the title of my piece. Folks, I voted the 1st day of early voting.  My wife went later.  While there my wife told me an elderly gentleman was livid when they wouldn’t allow him to vote.  Seems that the gentleman had recently moved into our precinct and had not received his voting registration certificate.  Though he had all sorts of identification and his former voting certificate from his previous precinct he was held back.  He then began to shout, “I’m a Korean and Vietnam veteran and I went to fight for this country for our freedoms!  I’m going to have leg surgery tomorrow and I don’t know if I can come back before the polls close on Nov. 6th! Ya’ll are not allowed to ask minorities and even those who are here illegally for a voter ID and here ya’ll are treating me like I’m not worthy to vote though I went to fight for our country!”  My wife, a Hispanic, stated, “James, I hate to say this, but I agreed with the vet!”


Share This Story on Facebook
Lowering the Bars Print E-mail
by John Browning    Wed, Oct 31, 2012, 10:27 AM

Lawyers don’t just automatically become full-fledged attorneys the moment they receive that piece of sheepskin with “Doctor of Jurisprudence” on it.  Typically, there are more hurdles, such as passing a state’s bar exam, passing an ethics exam known as the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam (MPRE), and being approved by a state bar’s authority for your moral character and fitness.  But there are many deviations from this typical path, particularly because of the sometimes mind-boggling differences in approaches among the 50 states.


For example, in some states it’s possible to become a lawyer without even going to law school.  Hearkening back to a bygone era in which aspiring lawyers “read the law” under the tutelage of an experienced practitioner, states like California, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington allow applicants to sit for the bar exam without attending law school.  They do, however, have to complete a period of study under the guidance of a judge or practicing attorney for an extended period of time—usually considerably longer than the 3 years that law school takes.  And in one state—Wisconsin—one can become a licensed attorney without even taking the bar exam.  As long as the person graduates from one of the two ABA-accredited law schools in the state (the University of Wisconsin Law School and Marquette University Law School), that person can automatically gain admission to the Wisconsin bar.


In addition to the typical degree and bar exam requirements, most states demand that a would-be lawyer demonstrate good moral character.  This can be highly subjective.  Sometimes, it seems like a clear call, as when those with past criminal convictions apply for admission to the bar.  At other times, it’s less clear.  In some jurisdictions, having past bankruptcies or serious credit issues can trip up an applicant.  In 2009, a candidate who had passed the New York bar exam was nevertheless denied admission by the New York Supreme Court because of excessive indebtedness (he had nearly $500,000 in unpaid student loan debt).  “Good moral character” has sometimes proven to be a moving target, subject to the values of another time.  For example, until the state’s Supreme Court reversed the policy in 1979, Virginia denied bar admission to female applicants for living with a man out of wedlock.


In some states, even taking the bar exam presents some quirks.  Louisiana—a state that already stands apart for the peculiarities of its state law, the Louisiana Civil Code—also does things differently when it comes to its bar examination.  You see, because it posts the results of the bar exam publicly on the front doors of the Louisiana State Supreme Court Building and on the Supreme Court’s official website, Louisiana allows its applicants to choose a fictitious name so that they can be spared public humiliation if they fail.  Pass, and your real name will be listed; fail, and your true identity remains a secret, your shame hidden by a pseudonym.  This year alone, the list of those who failed the Louisiana bar features some creative names, including fictional teen detective “Nancy Drew,” “Legally Blonde” lead character “Elle Woods,” “American Psycho” protagonist “Patrick Bateman,” “To Kill a Mockingbird” hero “Atticus Finch,” man of steel “Clark Kent,” and “Rongly Accused.”


          And if you think chivalry is not dead in Louisiana, you’ll love the dated Southern charm of Kentucky’s bar requirements.  I recently spoke at a law school symposium in Kentucky, and was surprised to learn that a quaint 19th artifact lives on for aspiring Kentucky lawyers.  Section 228 of the Kentucky Constitution requires all officers of the state and all members of the bar to take an oath swearing that they “have not fought a duel with deadly weapons within this State nor out of it,” nor have they “sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel with deadly weapons, nor . . . acted as second in carrying a challenge, nor aided or assisted any person thus offending.”  This provision was put in the state’s constitution back in 1849 in large part because previous laws against dueling hadn’t worked.  Since many of the Southern gentlemen who felt the need to duel were often those likely to run for office (some of whom also happened to be lawyers), lawmakers made sure not only to ban dueling but also to deprive duelers of “the right to hold any office of honor or profit in this Commonwealth.”  On an official Kentucky state government website, there is even a helpful article that traces the history of dueling in the state and the U.S. itself (including famous duels featuring such prominent historical figures as Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, Andrew Jackson, and Kentuckian Henry Clay), entitled “Kentucky and the Code Duello.”


So, in order to be a full-fledged Kentucky lawyer, it’s okay if you hate horse racing, frown upon mint juleps, and don’t know the words to “My Old Kentucky Home.”  You do, however, have to promise not to engage in a good old-fashioned, “pistols at thirty paces,” duel.  Because, after all, lawyers aren’t supposed to shoot or stab people—just bury them with paper and confound them with legalese.

Share This Story on Facebook
Career and Technical Education Legislative Forum Print E-mail
by Tom Pauken    Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 05:30 PM

Everywhere I go in Texas, employers tell me about the shortage of skilled workers and a greying workforce. The annual survey of Manpower Group for 2011 found that the hardest jobs to fill in the United States were for the skilled trades. A recent survey by the consulting firm Deloitte “found that 83% of manufacturers reported a moderate or severe shortage of skilled production workers for hire.” The results are similar here in Texas.

            Just to cite a few examples: the average age of a welder is 55, a plumber 56, and a stone masonry craftsman is 69.

What happened to our pipeline of skilled workers? Somehow, over the last two decades, certain political elites decided that everyone should be prepared to go to a four year university. I call it a “one size fits all” approach. In an attempt to make every high school student “college ready,” our state has come to rely on a so-called 4-by-4 curriculum and an expensive high stakes testing system. First, there was the TASS test, then the TAKS test, and now we have the STARR test. So much of our educational system is driven these days by a “teaching to the test” mentality from the third grade through high school. In many ways, test learning has replaced real learning. Meanwhile, in this quest to push every student to go to a university, we have deemphasized our Career and Technical Education programs at the high school level.

In his marvelous book “Shop Class as Soulcraft: An Inquiry into the Value of Work,” Mathew Crawford points out that “high-school shop-class programs were widely dismantled in the 1990s as educators prepared students to become “knowledge workers.” Writing at the time of the Great Recession four years ago, Crawford had this to say:

“This seems to be a moment when the useful arts have an especially compelling economic rationale. A car mechanics’ trade association reports that repair shops have seen their business jump significantly in the current recession: people aren’t buying new cars; they are fixing the ones they have. The current downturn is likely to pass eventually. But there are also systemic changes in the economy, arising from information technology, that have the surprising effect of making the manual trades – plumbing, electrical work, car repair – more attractive as careers. The Princeton economist Alan Blinder argues that the crucial distinction in the emerging labor market is not between those with more or less education, but between those whose services can be delivered over a wire and those who must do their work in person or on site. The latter will find their livelihoods more secure against outsourcing the distant countries. As Blinder puts it, ‘You can’t hammer a nail over the Internet.’ Nor can the Indians fix your car. Because they are in India.”

To borrow a phrase from Will Rogers, “if stupidity got us into this mess, then why can’t it get us out?” The answer to this critical shortage of skilled workers is simple, but not easy. There are powerful interests arrayed to protect the existing system of education financing and performance measurements. The problem is that the system is broken -- and the average Texan gets it, even if many of the political elites don’t. The time is ripe for major reform of our educational system so that we place greater emphasis on vocational and technical education at the secondary and post-secondary school levels.

            Let’s replace the one-size-fits-all TAKS and STAAR tests that we use to evaluate all our students, with two different tests – one that measures college readiness for those who plan to pursue that route such as the ACT or SAT, and one that measures career readiness.

            We all learn differently. Some students don’t enjoy or do well in an abstract classroom setting -- I have a son like that -- but would excel by working with their hands in a skilled trade. That’s why a “hands on” approach to skills training is so important in preparing a student to be job ready.

            Let’s give our high school students the facts about the employment market. Young people who have completed an industry-certified skills training program in high school or in a post-secondary community college or career school have a better opportunity to get a good - paying job than many graduates of four-year universities. A graduate of Texas State Technical College with a two-year associates degree in the engineer – related technology field of instrumentation can go to work in the petro-chemical industry at a starting salary of $68,000. A master plumber can make $75,000 in three years. An industry – certified welder from the Craft Training Center in Corpus Christi can make $1,700 a week.

            If we are going to move in this direction of rebuilding our pipeline of skilled workers with increased opportunities for vocational education, we have to be creative in how we go about implementing these changes given our finite resources. Equipment is expensive for certain technical training programs, and we have to be resourceful in providing these opportunities to our young people.

            We need to avoid expensive duplication of services wherever possible. The Craft Training Center in Corpus Christi is a great example of a public-private partnership that provides skills training for high school students in the day and adults in the evening in a cost effective fashion. Students from 14 area school districts and a charter school come to a central location at the training center where they receive industry-certified instruction to become welders, electricians, pipefitters, and in other skilled trades. Anne Matula runs the Craft Training Center, and she points out that students who get skills training there also do better academically as they learn to appreciate the importance of basic math and literacy skills in mastering the craft they are learning. In fact, research from the Texas Workforce Commission Labor Market and Career Information division has found that students who take a coherent sequence of CTE courses do better academically, have higher graduation rates, lower dropout rates, and better college attendance.

            We also should do more to empower community colleges to partner with school districts across the state. San Angelo area high schools operate a workforce training center with Howard College where high school students can earn an industry- certified credential in fields ranging from building and trades to allied health professions. Students not only get industry-certified training but also get dual credit. A similar program is operational in Mt. Pleasant with the high school and Northeast Texas Community College.

            Some community colleges have underutilized capacity that could be made available to provide technical training to local high school students. As a state, we need to make it more attractive for such partnerships to develop and flourish.

            A major priority in the next legislative session must be to fix a misguided education policy with a common sense solution which recognizes that students have different talents and interests. I want to make it clear that I fully support holding schools accountable through a multiple pathway approach to a high school diploma. But, the current system does not hold schools accountable for successfully educating and preparing students-rather it makes them beholden to performance on a single test. Success and accountability can be measured in a variety of ways.

            Some critics of my emphasis on reinstating vocational education as a key component in a comprehensive high school educational curriculum claim that I want to go back to tracking certain students, particularly minorities, away from college and into career education. Well, we already have a tracking system under the existing education policy -- it’s called the drop out track.

            Such claims fail to acknowledge that we are losing too many kids who lose interest in education at an early age and who might have thrived had they been given more opportunities for career and technical education in high school. A renewed recognition of the value of vocational education for those students so interested can provide an opportunity pathway for many students who otherwise might fall through the cracks under a “one size fits all” approach to education.

            Much of the emphasis on testing – including the unveiling of the STAAR program – is a well-intentioned effort to improve education attainment in Texas. But we’ve put most of our emphasis on standardized testing for the past two decades, and yet we still have a big problem with dropout rates, and increased scores on state exams often don’t translate into improved college entrance exam scores.

            The usual response from the testing bureaucracy is to roll out a new test, make a few technical changes to the accountability system, and promise everything will be better if we just give it a chance to work. That’s what they said when TAAS became TAKS, and that’s what they’re saying now that TAKS is becoming STAAR.

            Frustration on the part of parents, employers, and educators with the current system has built up for years. Change is long overdue, and we need to have the courage to propose bold, meaningful solutions to these issues, rather than just tinkering around the edges.

            It’s time to end one-size-fits-all and restore local control to our public school system. Instead of having the government telling students and parents what it thinks their career future should be, let’s provide good information to parents and let individuals choose what’s best for them. Let’s have a system that encourages students and school districts to work with local employers to fill good jobs in industry and manufacturing.

            Our state faces serious workforce challenges in the future as the “Baby-Boom” generation retires. The only way to solve them is to move away from failed policies and move toward what works.

            It’s time to recognize that the current “Teach to the Test” system is a failure and replace it with local control and individual freedom. I look forward to working with the people in this room to achieve those ends. Thank you.


Remarks by Tom Pauken at Headliners Club, Austin, Texas on October 18, 2012


Tom Pauken is Commissioner Representing Employers at Texas Workforce Commission

Share This Story on Facebook
Witches Need Lawyers, Too Print E-mail
by John Browning    Wed, Oct 24, 2012, 08:55 AM

Pity the poor witch.  Long-vilified in literature (Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”), folklore, and in films ranging from “The Wizard of Oz,” to “The Blair Witch Project,” those broomstick-riding, spell-casting sisters just can’t catch a break.  Why, in Romania (a country where a substantial percentage of the population still believes in witchcraft), the government even passed labor laws in 2011 that forced fortunetellers and self-proclaimed witches to pay income taxes.  Practitioners of the “dark arts” like Bratara Buzea spoke out against the law, and even threatened to cast spells on the offending lawmakers.


Witches don’t get any more respect in court, where apparently they’re not welcome as expert witnesses.  In Manhattan’s State Supreme Court in New York recently, a defense attorney attempted to introduce “expert” testimony on witchcraft during the murder trial of 42 year-old Bakary Camara.  Mr. Camara, a Senegalese immigrant, is accused of killing ex-girlfriend Rita Morelli last fall; he pleaded not guilty, saying he was under the influence of evil spirits (psychiatrists have already ruled out Camara’s previous assertion that he was delusional during the killing).  Defense attorney Seema Iyer sought to introduce testimony from Cheikh Ndao—a self-described imam from Africa who claims to be an expert on Senegalese curses and witchcraft.  Prosecutors were skeptical of the man they called a “witch doctor,” and so was Justice Juan Merchan.  He ruled that the defense had failed to demonstrate that Mr. Ndao satisfied the definition of an expert.  Perhaps if he had turned the judge into a newt?


Yes, witches aren’t feeling the love in our courtrooms.  Despite this, the descendants of some accused witches are turning to the legal system to seek formal exoneration for those executed for witchcraft during the 17th century.  Bernice Mable Graham Telian is one such person, seeking to clear the name of her ancestor Mary Barnes, who was hanged as a witch for “familiarity with Satan” in Connecticut in 1663.  Connecticut executed 11 women for witchcraft between 1647 and 1663, and in fact witchcraft remained a capital crime until 1750.


Telian has been aided in her quest by the Connecticut Wiccan & Pagan Network.  But she faces an uphill battle.  Although the governor can issue a pardon for someone convicted of a crime (essentially removing or reducing the sentence that was imposed, but not reversing the conviction itself), Telian is seeking something more: a formal declaration that Mary Barnes was not a criminal.  In 2008, the Connecticut state legislature weighed a resolution that would have formally acknowledged victims of the witch trials, but the measure failed.  Other activists have suggested that Governor Dannel Malloy should issue a proclamation apologizing for the colonial-era executions and exonerating the convicted “witches.”


Three other New England states that executed women accused of witchcraft—Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont—have already formally acknowledged the injustice of these executions.  The most notorious, of course, took place in Massachusetts during the Salem witch trials of 1692.  Nearly 200 people were accused of engaging in witchcraft or “consorting with the Devil” during the hysteria that swept Salem in the summer of 1692.  Twenty of those accused—15 women and 5 men—were executed; 19 were hanged, while octogenarian farmer Giles Cory was crushed to death for refusing to enter a plea.  Another four of the accused, three women and one man, died in jail.  One of the accused, a girl named Dorcas Good, was only four years old.


The accused were predominantly people who were perceived as outsiders by the rigid Puritan society.  Sarah Good, for example, was a local beggar who rarely attended church.  Sarah Osborne, one of the first women accused, had scandalized the village by having an affair (while unmarried) with an indentured servant from Ireland.  Martha Cory was accused of being a witch after giving birth to an illegitimate biracial child.  A number of other residents of Salem were accused after expressing skepticism at the cries of witchcraft by the young girls who started the madness in the village.  These included people like John Proctor and his wife Elizabeth, Susannah Martin, Sarah Cloyce, Dorcas Hoar, and George Jacobs.  Many of the accusations were leveled by members of the Putnam family, who just months before had lost power in Salem after they and their supporters were replaced on the village’s governing committee.  Eight members of the Putnam family were involved in the prosecution of about 50 accused witches.


Typically, these cases would begin with a formal complaint by a party allegedly injured by someone’s “witchcraft,” but any resemblance to our modern criminal proceedings ended there.  Accused witches were presumed guilty, not afforded any right to legal counsel, and the magistrates and presiding judges would usually ask leading questions that presumed that acts of witchcraft had taken place.  And although juries were empaneled to consider guilt or innocence, on at least one occasion, a jury that had acquitted a defendant was ordered to “reconsider” their verdict; not surprisingly, the jury reversed itself.  The “evidence” presented was a joke: nine accused witches were convicted based on nothing more than testimony from an alleged victim who testified to having been visited during the night by a spectral figure who resembled the defendant.  Others were convicted when they had difficulty reciting the Lord’s Prayer.


Eventually, the hysteria died down.  Reverend Increase Mather, a respected clergyman from Harvard, questioned the reliability of the “evidence.”  The trials, which had begun in June 1692, formally ended when Massachusetts Governor William Phipps dissolved the presiding tribunal in October of that year.  In spring 1693, Phipps ordered all of the remaining incarcerated accused witches released.


Meanwhile, in Connecticut, Bernice Telian seeks justice for Mary Barnes—even if it is nearly 450 years too late.

Share This Story on Facebook
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Results 46 - 60 of 2648