Fine Art Publishing
Trunc Boutique
929 N. Second Street
Philadelphia
.
MEET THE ARTIST
First Friday Opening Night
Date: October 4, 2024
Time: 6pm-8pm
.
To learn more about Trunc Boutique Philly link here: https://www.trunc.net
Text by Bob Shell, Copyright 2024
.
Censorship is Alive and Well in Virginia
.
In Virginia, prison inmates do not have Internet. I am on my seventeenth year as a prisoner of the Virginia Department of Corrections (VDOC), so I have gone over sixteen years without Internet. I have “email,” sort of, through a company called JPay. Each email costs me 25¢ and it costs the same for people to write to me. It can take a week to get to the recipient!
In my institutional job I make a princely sum of $ 32.40 a month! Just over a dollar a day. That would have been good pay in the 1860s! It’s less than I made in my first high school summer job back in the 1960s!
As most of you already know, I’m a professional photographer/writer. I can say that I am a professional because from the mid-1970s I’ve been published in a number of magazines and newspapers, with over 1,000 magazine articles to my credit. Since 1986 I’ve authored/coauthored/ghosted more than two dozen books. My books and articles have been published in German, French, Spanish, Italian, Japanese, Chinese, Russian, Serbian, etc. I’ve written for several websites and this blog. I’ve worked as an editor of magazines and books, and as a fact checking consultant for National Geographic Books and Eastman Kodak Company.
Until 2007 I made a very good living from my writing and photography. My capsule biography was included in ‘Who’s Who in the World’ and in ‘American Artists’ since 1981. I write under Bob Shell and my main pseudonym, Edward Lee.
In 2003 my comfortable life was destroyed by a false arrest for a crime that never occurred. I wasn’t tried and convicted until 2007. The Innocence Project has taken my case, but it’s slow going because they have so many cases.
I’ve continued writing from prison, contributing op-ed articles for The Roanoke Star newspaper and articles about dinosaurs for Prehistoric Times magazine, and in 2019 I self-published the book ‘Cosmic Dance,’ which has sold reasonably well worldwide via Amazon despite having no promotional budget. Like most books, sales dropped off after the initial surge, and I only sell one or two a month now.
Most of my writing prior to my imprisonment had been nonfiction. In 2021 I began working on my first novel, ‘The Adventure of the Abducted Actress,’ a genre detective story featuring the Harley Stone Detective Agency (HSDA). I invented the HSDA and most of its cast of unusual characters in 1973. A few short stories I wrote about the HSDA were published in limited-circulation “fanzines.”
This first HSDA novel was completed in September of 2023 and sent to the company that assembled my first self-published book. In early November they mailed me a bound author’s proof. I didn’t get it. In mid-November I was transferred to a different prison.
When the proof never came, the company emailed the proof to my attorney as a PDF file. He had it printed and sent a printout of the proof to me as legal mail because we cannot receive PDF files. On arrival that proof was read and confiscated. (Violating attorney-client confidentiality as well as VDOC operating procedure.) Then in August of this year the bound proof mailed last November finally showed up here. But it was immediately confiscated.
To add insult to injury, that proof had been sent to the VDOC’s Publication Review Committee. They’d put it on their Disapproved Publications Listing. (I am in good company. Dr. Anthony Fauci’s latest book is on there.)
The Disapproved Publications Listing contains hundreds of books and magazine. The very existence of the Publication Review Committee and Disapproved Publications Listing are unconstitutional censorship.
Yes, my book has sex scenes, but there is nothing in my book beyond what’s in dozens of books in the institutional library here.
The librarian said if he had to remove every book with scenes like mine, he’d empty out the library.
I have argued until I’m blue in the face that an unpublished manuscript is not a publication by their own definition (An item that can be purchased from a vendor or subscribed to). They have given me nonsense responses to my grievances, even claiming that the book had been for sale since 2019! It is not on sale anywhere because it has not been published due to their interference.
I will not allow the book to be published until I have had a chance to correct the proof, so, by refusing to give me my author’s proof, the VDOC has blocked me from publishing my book. I am losing money every day the book is not for sale.
The Grievance Coordinator says I must take the matter into court. I don’t have the money to hire a lawyer to push this case. I need help! If anyone reading this knows of an organization or group that would help me defend my constitutional rights, please let me know.
Article One, Section Twelve, of the Virginia Constitution says “Any citizen may freely speak, write, and publish his sentiments on all subjects.” I may be in prison, but I am still a citizen! ?
The VDOC is violating my constitutional rights under the Virginia Constitution and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
I haven’t joined any authors’ organizations because my institutional job pays me so little. It barely covers essentials at our grossly inflated commissary prices.
I hope someone can offer me help or direct me to someone who will help.
Thank you!
Mail address:
Robert E. L. Shell # 1201280
Dillwyn Correctional Center
P. O. Box 670
Dillwyn, VA 23936-0670
Mail address for legal mail:
Robert E. L. Shell # 1201280
Dillwyn Correctional Center
C/O: VDOC Centralized Mail Distribution Unit
3521 Woods Way
State Farm, VA 23160
You can email me by signing up at http://jpay.comusing my name, Robert Shell and state ID number, 1201280
.
About The Author: Bob Shell is a professional photographer, author, former editor in chief of Shutterbug Magazine and veteran contributor to this blog. He is currently serving a 35 year sentence for involuntary manslaughter for the death of Marion Franklin, one of his former models. He is serving the 17th year of his sentence at Pocahontas State Correctional Facility, Virginia.
On September 16, 2024 Shell’s release date got moved up six years due to new “mixed charges” law to February 2, 2030. It was 2036.
To read additional articles by Bob Shell link here: https://tonyward.com/bob-shell-oklahoma-youre-not-ok/
Online Dating
.
Swipe Right, Swipe Wrong: The Successes, Risks, and Failures of Online Dating
In today’s fast-paced, digitally-driven world, online dating has emerged as a popular avenue for finding love, connection, or even a fleeting encounter. With millions of users globally, platforms like Tinder, Bumble, and Match.com have revolutionized the way people meet and form relationships. However, the journey from a virtual match to a real-life connection is fraught with both potential successes and significant risks, as well as the possibility of failure.
The Successes: Love at First Swipe
The success stories are compelling. Many couples have found long-lasting relationships, marriages, and even families through online dating platforms. The accessibility and diversity these platforms offer allow users to connect with people they might never have met otherwise. For those with busy lifestyles, online dating offers a convenient way to meet like-minded individuals. The ability to filter potential matches by interests, values, and goals increases the likelihood of finding a compatible partner. For some, the anonymity of online communication can help build confidence and foster open, honest dialogue that might be difficult in face-to-face encounters.
The Risks: The Double-Edged Sword of Anonymity
However, the anonymity that facilitates open conversation can also be a breeding ground for deceit. One of the most significant risks of online dating is the potential for encountering dishonesty. From fake profiles to catfishing, where individuals pretend to be someone they’re not, the online dating world can be a minefield. There’s also the danger of scams, where fraudsters exploit emotional vulnerabilities for financial gain. Moreover, online dating can expose users to harassment and unwanted advances, with the safety of personal information becoming a major concern.
The Failures: When Expectations Meet Reality
Despite the potential for success, not all online dating experiences end well. The reality of meeting someone in person can starkly contrast with the carefully curated online persona. Misaligned expectations, whether about physical appearance, personality, or intentions, often lead to disappointment. Additionally, the sheer volume of choices on dating platforms can lead to a paradox of choice, where users find it challenging to commit to a single person, always wondering if someone “better” is just a swipe away.
In conclusion, online dating offers incredible opportunities to find meaningful connections but not without its pitfalls. Success requires careful navigation of the risks and a healthy dose of realism when translating a virtual relationship into real life. For every love story born online, there are tales of caution that remind us that the digital age of romance is as complex as it is convenient.
The Roberts Supreme Court
.
Shaping The Freedoms of American Citizens
.
The Roberts Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., has significantly influenced the landscape of American law, impacting the freedoms and rights of citizens in profound ways. Since Roberts’ appointment in 2005, the Court has navigated a complex array of issues, from voting rights to religious liberties, that have far-reaching consequences for the future of American democracy.
One of the most notable aspects of the Roberts Court is its conservative tilt, particularly following the appointments of Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. This conservative majority has led to decisions that have redefined the balance between state and federal powers, individual rights, and governmental authority. For example, in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the Court dismantled key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which had been instrumental in protecting minority voting rights. The decision shifted the responsibility of oversight from the federal government to the states, resulting in a wave of new voting laws that critics argue have made it more difficult for some citizens to exercise their right to vote.
Religious freedom is another area where the Roberts Court has left its mark. The Court has expanded the scope of religious liberties, often at the expense of other constitutional rights. In Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (2014), the Court ruled that closely-held for-profit corporations could refuse to provide contraception coverage under the Affordable Care Act if it conflicted with the owners’ religious beliefs. This decision marked a significant moment in the intersection of religious freedom and women’s rights, raising concerns about the potential for religious liberties to be used as a basis for limiting other freedoms.
The Roberts Court has also played a pivotal role in the ongoing debates over Second Amendment rights. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Court affirmed an individual’s right to possess firearms, striking down Washington D.C.’s handgun ban. This ruling set a precedent that has been instrumental in subsequent cases, shaping the national dialogue on gun control and individual rights.
Looking forward, the Roberts Court is likely to continue influencing the direction of American freedoms, especially as it confronts issues related to technology, privacy, and executive power. The decisions made by this Court will have long-lasting implications, determining how future generations of Americans understand and exercise their freedoms. As the nation navigates a rapidly changing social and political landscape, the rulings of the Roberts Supreme Court will remain central to shaping the future of American liberties.
Politics: Who is Leonard Leo?
.
Leonard Leo: The Power Broker Behind America’s Judicial Shift
In the landscape of American politics, few individuals wield as much behind-the-scenes influence as Leonard Leo. As the former executive vice president of the Federalist Society, a conservative legal organization, Leo has played a pivotal role in reshaping the judiciary to reflect a more conservative philosophy. This has raised concerns about the long-term implications of his influence on the state of democracy in the USA.
The Architect of Conservative Judicial Dominance
Leonard Leo’s career is a testament to the power of strategic legal maneuvering. He has been instrumental in the nomination and confirmation of several Supreme Court justices, including John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. These appointments have shifted the Supreme Court to a solid conservative majority, potentially affecting rulings on key issues for decades.
Leo’s influence extends beyond the Supreme Court. He has been involved in placing conservative judges in lower federal courts, thereby shaping the judiciary at multiple levels. This systematic approach ensures that conservative legal principles influence a broad spectrum of legal decisions, from district courts to the highest court in the land.
Political Beliefs and Judicial Philosophy
Leonard Leo’s political beliefs are grounded in a strict interpretation of the Constitution, often referred to as originalism. This philosophy argues that the Constitution should be interpreted based on the original understanding of its text at the time it was written. While this approach has its merits, critics argue that it can lead to regressive rulings that do not consider the evolving context of modern society.
Leo’s influence has been particularly pronounced in cases involving reproductive rights, affirmative action, voting rights, and environmental regulations. The conservative majority he helped build has made significant rulings, such as the rollback of Roe v. Wade, which underscores the profound impact of his judicial strategy.
The Dangers to Democracy
The consolidation of judicial power in the hands of a particular ideology poses significant dangers to the state of democracy. A judiciary that consistently rules in favor of conservative principles can undermine progressive legislation, even when it reflects the will of the majority. This can lead to a disconnect between public opinion and judicial outcomes, eroding trust in democratic institutions.
One of the most concerning aspects of Leo’s influence is the potential for entrenching minority rule. The conservative legal philosophy often supports decisions that favor the interests of the powerful over those of marginalized groups. This can exacerbate existing inequalities and hinder efforts to achieve social justice.
Moreover, the emphasis on originalism can hinder the judiciary’s ability to adapt to contemporary challenges. Issues like climate change, digital privacy, and evolving social norms require a judiciary capable of interpreting the Constitution in a manner that addresses present-day realities. A rigid adherence to originalism can stifle this necessary evolution, leaving the judiciary ill-equipped to protect the rights and interests of future generations.
The Path Forward
Addressing the challenges posed by Leonard Leo’s influence requires a multifaceted approach. First, there is a need for greater transparency in the judicial nomination process. The involvement of secretive organizations and dark money in shaping the judiciary undermines public trust and accountability.
Second, there must be a concerted effort to balance the ideological composition of the courts. This includes advocating for judicial nominees who represent a broader spectrum of legal philosophies and ensuring that the judiciary reflects the diversity of the American populace.
Finally, it is crucial to engage in robust civic education to foster a deeper understanding of the judiciary’s role in democracy. An informed public is better equipped to hold leaders accountable and advocate for a judiciary that upholds democratic principles.
Conclusion
Leonard Leo’s legacy is a testament to the profound impact one individual can have on the judicial landscape. While his influence has solidified a conservative stronghold in the judiciary, it also highlights the fragility of democratic institutions. Ensuring a judiciary that reflects the evolving values of society and maintains the trust of the public is essential for the health of American democracy. As the nation grapples with these challenges, the lessons of Leonard Leo’s influence serve as both a cautionary tale and a call to action.