i
* Tuesday,]®
TALION
T|esd;iy,June 20, 2(XX)
aiwMgs
The plot revolves around
(Carrey), who has beenbof
his anger since his wifeleftli
black midget. Charlie hassjt
past 18 years raising his tin
sons, all of whom aregeni®
good-natured Charlie snaps
ates a split personality, Hank
a foul-mouthed, take-no-crap!
who deals with Charlie'spt
Irene (Zellweger) comes
Entrepreneurship
classes needed
espite the good
standing of the
Lowry Mays College
>f Business and its well-qual
ified and capable teaching
the damsel in disfe >taff, Texas A&M's business
though it is never stated win
trouble. Charlie becomesimi
a scheme wherein a golf com
off government officials toliidf
thing, but the details of them
and the people involved arers
plained. But this matters little:
film does not suffer muchfre:
plot holes.
, Myself and Irene is ml i
'e's Something About Mi
an original comech
entertaining and prow
he best comedies fc
Me
as The
highly
one of
(Grade: B+)
— Ki/lt'i
Shaft
Starring: Samuel L. Jacks
Christian Bale
Directed by: John Singlet
Rated R
Who's the black privatedid
a sex machine for all the chick 1
And who's the acclaimed 4
who pulls off an excellentremi
'70s cult classic? John Singletoi
Although this is an excellcr
do not expect the smooth John:
go through the movie"sti
man" and getting all the lads
remake is different from the of:
In this installment, Shaft::
on the tail of rich, w
Williams(Bale),who commits):
hate crime and gets awaywil
cause of his connections. OMf
Shaft will not stand for thisr: r
to bring Williams to justice |
The film seems more IWf'l
cop film with the race car dpi#!
every turn. Thd film isexcitim [
an incredible performance byl)
Wright, whose portrayal of'
dealer Peoples Hernandezwfr
him one of the more sought-after:
next year.
The film picks up pace astir
becomes more intricate and ik
plodes into excellent actionth
livers gritty, edgy police vie
which is far more realistictki
goofy, fantasy violence of the:
pointing Mission: Impossible!
This film is cool from start!
ish and a great movie lose
summer. (Grade: A-)
rograms fail to provide an
mdergraduate degree plan
hat would promote the en-
repreneurial skills that have so visibly benefited
nany college graduates, especially over the past r
0 years.
Currently offering undergraduate degrees in
iccounting, finance, information systems, mar- .
ceting and management, the College of Business
las created a solid base for its undergraduate
tudents to enter the corporate business world,
t is time, however, for the University to advo
cate not only basic business skills, but also a de
gree plan that will educate Lowry Mays alumni
on becoming pioneers in the business world, not
,ust entering it.
Stanford University, an institution that has
been promoting entrepreneurship for over a
decade, encourages students to take risks and ex
plore their creative ideas. The fruits of such ef
forts can be seen in Stanford graduates who have
become founders of successful businesses such as
Hewlett-Packard, Cisco Systems, Charles Schwab
Corporation, Yahoo! and Gap Incorporated.
Looking a bit closer to home, A&M should
take note of Baylor University's Hankamer
School of Business.
In addition to stan
dard business de
grees, the Hankamer
School offers an un
dergraduate degree
in entrepreneurship
that focuses on the
creative develop
ment and financing
of a new venture.
The core curriculum
in the entrepreneur
ial degree plan pro
motes such concepts
as the development
of creative thinking
skills, the formula
tion of business
ideas and the cre
ation of new busi
ness opportunities.
In addition, these
courses are support-
Center
OF BRAZOS VALLB,
BE PREGNAU
IF I AM?
jnseling Service
fidentiality
Abortion Risks
ion Counseling
icy Test
:d. & Fri. 9-5 • Sat. 8-12
3620 E. 29TH ST • Bl
www.rtis.comi
Wednesdd
zos Groove Author!!
s no cover before 9:30 p.
Frida!
Variety Dance Musi
uring Manny Beraza '5 co
ta Plates
9:30 p.m.
musicians play!
:et, Downtown Bryan
5-7735
Though
conservotism
may seem to
pay off slowly
and consis
tently in the
business
world, there
are students
who desire to
test their own
limits and the
bounds of
this thriving
economy.
ed by a well-round
ed array of courses in finance, management and
even accounting.
The closest A&M undergraduate degrees
come to fostering entrepreneurship is an elective
option to the management degree titled "Entre
preneurship and Small Business." Though this
may seem sufficient, this option only touches the
tip of the iceberg of entrepreneurial knowledge.
In actuality. Management 461, Entrepreneur
and New Ventures, is the only-course in the un
dergraduate curriculum that really substantiates
the title of the track. Comparing Baylor's and
A&M's course catalogs, MGMT 461 is simply all
nine of Baylor's entrepreneurial courses
crammed into one.
Because the Lowry Mays College of Business
already employs a well-qualified staff, it is per
plexing that an entrepreneurship degree has not
yet come to full fruition. The teaching staff of the
business school is full of talented professors and
lecturers who are capable of teaching courses
such as Baylor's Entrepreneurship 3320, Venture
Initiation. This course focuses on the start-up
phase, opportunity recognition and the procure
ment of additional financing, and it could easily
be incorporated into the curriculum currently of
fered by A&M's finance department.
In a decade in which Silicon Valley teams
Iwith young, Internet start-up millionaires and
NASDAQ fuels a booming economy, A&M must
offer courses that will teach students to take full
dvantage of their various opportunities. Ex-
ecting students to take additional several years
to receive a master's in business before obtain
ing true entrepreneurial knowledge is like
elling a talented 100-meter hurdler to just wait
or the next Olympics.
Though conservatism may seem to pay off
lowly and consistently in the business world,
Ifthere are students who desire to test their own
limits and the bounds of this thriving economy.
(The Lowry Mays College of Business needs to
loosen its tie and offer these students the entre-
;; preneurial education that will allow them to capi-
alize on their abilities immediately following
uaduation.
Elizabeth Kohl is a senior accounting major.
Page 5
THIJ BATTALION
Quoth the Raven: “Not guilty”
Ray Lewis innocent of murder, prosecutor at fault for trial travesty
O n the evening
of Jan. 31,2000,
Ray Lewis was
indirectly involved in a
scuffle outside a Balti
more night club and
sports bar that ulti
mately resulted in the
slaying of Jacinth Baker
and Richard Lollar. Lewis was then subse
quently charged with capital murder.
Before that fateful evening, Ray Lewis
was known for his stellar ability on the
football field as a Baltimore Raven, for his
good-hearted nature and for his generosity
in sharing in his fi
nancial success KUSS. 'SSI 4 )&£ W
amongst his family.
Today Lewis
can boast another
accomplishment.
He has survived a
vicious attack on
his credibility, his
reputation, his ca
reer and, most im
portantly, his life.
Lewis was the vic
tim of a terrible
abuse of power
brought on by Lul-
ton County Dis
trict Attorney Paul
Howard. Howard,
whose legal meth
ods resembled a
boxer flailing Ms
arms about in ef
forts to strike any
thing, set the stage
for the fiasco that
was the Ray Lewis
murder trial by
choosing to indict
Lewis before suffi
ciently investigat
ing the case.
Instead of hav
ing a legitimate de
sire to sort through
evidence and arrive at the truth, prosecu
tors in this trial showed more interest in
getting a conviction. When it was made ap
parent that Lewis was guilty of little more
than distorting the truth in statements
made to police during the aftermath of the
murders, Lewis went from being the prose
cutors' worst enemy to an ally in their
quest for distorted justice. This time, the
district attorney aimed for Reginald Oak
ley and Joseph Sweeting, two men with
Lewis the evening of the crime.
The inconsistency in the prosecution's
tactics was a direct result of their lack of
credible evidence. John Bergendahl, an at
torney for Sweeting, told jurors that in or
der to win a murder conviction, prosecu
tors presented a case that has changed
shape several times. The logic used by
Howard and his cohorts was that some
body, anybody, needed to be held account
able for the deaths of Baker and Lollar,
who were fatally stabbed that night. To say
that this is unprofessional conduct is an un
derstatement.
In the early stages of the investigation,
the prosecutors pressed hard for an indict-
refocused on the prosecution and its low-
blow tactics. Realizing that its case com
prised purely circumstantial evidence, the
prosecution switched gears abruptly and
presented Lewis with a settlement.
Lewis was to be exonerated of the
killings and receive one year of probation
in exchange for his testimony against Oak
ley and Sweeting. Part of the deal was
Lewis' admission of guilt stating he had
lied to police on previous occasions and re
sulting in a misdemeanor conviction of
"obstruction of justice."
Howard presented Baker and Lollar as
innocent victims who were chased, beaten
ment. They wanted to play the media card
and use it to their advantage. Due to the
notoriety of the National Lelony League
that NLL players have been receiving,
Howard believed the coverage Lewis
would receive would all be negative, facili
tating a conviction. However, Howard's
presentation of the case was flawed from
the beginning, and his plan backfired al
most immediately. As more and more evi
dence presented by Howard was de
bunked by the defense, suspicious glances
and fatally stabbed by Oakley and Sweet
ing. Lewis, apparently in bad shape for a
professional athlete, could not keep up and
simply observed. Lewis painted a much
clearer picture of what actually happened
that night, including testimony that Oakley
and Sweeting had knives and might have
used them. The jury concluded after hours
of testimony and cross examination that
Baker and Lollar had initiated a verbal con
frontation with Lewis and his companions.
Baker and Lollar were also the first ones to
use force that evening. During the argu
ment, Baker hit Oakley over the head with
a full bottle of champagne. What ensued
was described by Lewis as "all hell break-.
ing loose." The jury concluded that if Oak:
ley did stab Baker and Lollar, he acted in
self defense. They concluded the same for •
Sweeting, who, according to Lewis, was
fighting two guys who were larger than he.
The reasoning was the same used in a-
playground fight — he who hit first got the
time out.
By not allowing for sufficient investiga
tion prior to the indictments, the over-zeal
ous Howard damaged three lives instead
of working to find thje
truth about the two
that were lost. ‘
In the aftermath
of the three acquittals
there is more injus-1
tice at work. Journal
ists are already stab-
ing that, despite
Lewis's exoneration,
he deserves the in-1
famy that will no *
doubt plague him for
some time becauselof
his dishonesty witH-
law enforcement offi
cials. In the ignorant
words of John Eisen-
burg, columnist for;.
the SunSpot, a Mary
land newspaper, c
"You can't plea-barr
gain infamy, a sanc-L
tion that's going to \
stick with Ray Lewis
a lot longer than a 3
year's probation ona
misdemeanor oh- \
struction of justice '
charge." Eisenburg -
compares Lewis to .
John Rocker, Roberto
Alomar and Latrell •
Sprewell, all of
whom Eisenburg con
siders to be guilty of bringing a bad name/
to their respective sports.
Paul Howard should be blamed for these
irrational thoughts, which will undoubtedly
surface again. Not only has he ignored the-
phrase "innocent until proven guilty," heis*
promoting a new one: "Those charged will
suffer the consequences of guilt even after '
being proven innocent."
Luke McMahan is a senior
industrial engineering major.
JEFF SMITH/The Battalion
Court rightfully puts cap on visitation rights suits
T 1
;
[hanks to a Supreme Court rul
ing, there is one less worry for
future parents. Recently, the
court ruled that a Washington state
law allowing any adult to sue a parent
for child visitation rights was uncon
stitutional and "breathtatyngly
broad." The case that prompted the re
view involved Gary and Jenifer Troxel,
grandparents who wanted to visit their two granddaugh
ters despite objection from the girls' mother, Tommie
Granville Wynn.
The Supreme Court ruling was justified because this
law allowed anyone, not only relatives, to sue for visitation
rights, and this law was the "long arm" of the American
government reaching into the American family unit.
The law allowing a third party to petition for visitation
rights allowed the U.S. government to intrude into the per
sonal lives of many citizens. The law did not say the par
ents had to be ruled unfit. It just said the court could de
cide who visits the child. The law was written with the
belief that a court, rather than a parent, should decide
what is in the best interest of the child.
In writing the majority opinion. Justice Sandra Day O'
Connor said that parents Inave the right to raise a child
without government interference. The Supreme Court ba
sically decided that if parents and grandparents cannot
agree about visitation, the government is not going to step
in. This ruling came as a blow for many grandparents in
Washington, but it does not affect many states' grandpar
ent visitation laws.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) com
pletely agreed with the ruling. The ACLU sees it as a vic
tory for the homosexual community. O'Connor also says
that the American family is no longer a traditional family
and that third-party involvement needs to be limited. Ac
cording to the ACLU, this ruling will help nontraditional
families when others, including grandparents, try to sue
for visitation rights.
With many divorced and single-parent homes, grand
parents are not usually in the picture. If the court allowed
disgruntled grandparents, along with any other person, to
sue for visitation rights, the government would become
that evil big brother nobody wants. By letting the courts
and government decide what is in the best interest of the
child, they enter into the sacred domain of the personal life
of the average citizen. In the opinion of the court, the 14th
Amendment due process clause protects parents in the
rearing of children and in deciding who may visit.
It is not the job of the government to raise children who
have fit and willing parents. When the government is al
lowed to tell a parent who can and cannot visit that par
ent's child, American parents' rights will be nullified and
the family unit will cease to exist. If the government takes
away parents' rights to raise children as they see fit, it
oversteps the bounds of its control.
When the founding fathers wrote the Constitution, they
did not organize the government to be everyone's parent.
They wrote it to protect the rights of the citizens so that
overbearing government would not occur. Lor now, par
ents can breathe a sigh of relief knowing that meddling
busy bodies, including grandparents, cannot sue to visit
with their children.
j Brieanne Porter is a sophomore chemical engineering major.