Welcome to HackLawyer.net

In the coming months, a new movie about a killing in East Texas will hit the theaters.  Titled simply “Bernie,” starring Jack Black in the lead role, the film depicts the story of Bernard Tiede, a gay, mild-mannered associate funeral director in the town of Carthage, Texas who was by most accounts one of the most liked citizens of that small East Texas town.  Somewhere along the line, he managed to befriend Marjorie Nugent, a very rich widow with lots of oil money who owned a local bank to boot.  But the town’s richest citizen was no angel.  In fact, she was, in the words of some of the gossips in Carthage, the “meanest woman in East Texas.”  Soon after meeting Ms. Nugent, Bernie became her constant companion, living in her mansion and traveling to distant locations with her.  He also began to manage her money.  As their “relationship” blossomed, Ms. Nugent arranged for Bernie to inherit her entire estate upon her death.  But even that anticipated windfall couldn’t dissuade Bernie from shooting Ms. Nugent four times in the back on a November evening in 1997.  What led up to that fateful shooting and the surreal events which followed make up the content of “Bernie.”

No one in town could deny that Bernie pumped four .22 bullets into Ms. Nugent.  Nor could the townspeople quibble about the fact that instead of contacting law enforcement, he instead “buried” Ms. Nugent in the freezer with a sprinkling of chicken pot pie packages placed on top of her frozen body.  And it seemed that when the case broke, no one in town was really that upset that Ms. Nugent’s body remained in that frozen state for nine months before the Panola County Sheriff’s Department finally began to look for her.  In fact, the town of Carthage actually benefited during that nine-month spell since Bernie continued to spend Ms. Nugent’s money not only on himself but on various projects around town, among them replacing the city’s decrepit Christmas lights with new ones.  All courtesy of Marjorie Nugent’s money, of course.

Naturally, anyone from outside Carthage would want to know how this town’s grand dame could go missing for nine months and not a single Carthaginian would notice or even care.  That was an indication of just how despised she was around town.  But what about Ms. Nugent’s family?  She hadn’t spoken to her sister in years and her son, Dr. Rod Nugent from right here in Amarillo, Texas, wasn’t the one to contact police about his missing mother.  In fact, it was the Panola County Sheriff’s Department who contacted Dr. Nugent about his mother.  What does that say about the bonds between mother and son?  OK, we all have knowledge of dysfunctional families and estranged adult children and parents.  But what is most bizarre about this whole affair was the scene which unfolded soon after the discovery of Ms. Nugent’s body each and every morning down at the town’s most popular restaurant, Daddy Sam’s Barbecue.  There, the duly-elected District Attorney, Danny Buck Davidson, would be surrounded and assailed by townspeople, desperately trying to persuade the prosecutor not to indict Bernie for the murder of Nugent.  Although many wouldn’t come right out and say it, the message was clear: if anyone deserved to be killed, it was Marjorie Nugent.

What followed was the inevitable indictment, pre-trial proceedings and trial which ended up badly for Bernie. He was convicted, primarily on the basis of his frank and candid confession, and sentenced to life in prison. I mean, what else could any jury do when Bernie himself says that he killed Ms. Nugent because she was just so mean and he felt that he couldn’t get away from her.  That didn’t help; nor did the fact that he admitted that he had been thinking about shooting her for two months leading up to the day of the shooting.  So, it was life in prison as the inevitable conclusion to the affair.  But it still did not change any of the collective minds in Carthage about whether Marjorie Nugent actually had it coming or whether life in prison for Bernie was a just and fair resolution to the case.

The film co-stars Shirley MacLaine as the “meanest woman in town” and also takes advantage of several townspeople who are given speaking roles.  Several of the most conspicuous and chattiest town gossips figure prominently in the film and are simply allowed to speak their minds about the events.  Onlookers to the shooting schedule, recently completed on location in Carthage, tell of how the locals would actually express open hostility toward MacLaine on the set, so convincing was the actress in her portrayal of Nugent. Jack Black, expertly aping the gestures and affectations of Tiede, elicited coos and delight from this Greek chorus.  Consider some of these comments: Gossip #1: “Well, hell, even if he did do it, she was so mean and ornery, she had it coming to her.”  Gossip #2: “It’s not as bad as people say it is.  He only shot her four times, not five.”  Like I said, you can’t make this stuff up.  From what I’ve heard, D.A. Davidson has put his own good housekeeping seal of approval on the finished product, declaring that the movie is fairly accurate in exactly what it portrays the characters to be.  I can’t wait to see this one.

You most likely don’t know his name or what he looked like, but one of rock’s most prolific and original bassists died yesterday in Tokyo, Japan at the age of 70.  His name was Duck Dunn and he helped create, define and preserve the unique Memphis soul sound as an early member of Booker T and the MG’s.  His death was confirmed by Steve Cropper, his long-time friend and fellow bandmember in the MG’s.  Of course, musicologists know who Steve Cropper is - just think “In the Midnight Hour,” one of Cropper’s early compositions.

As the resident bassist for Stax Records in the 60’s, Dunn provided backup to such artists and hits as Wilson Pickett in his cover of “Midnight Hour,” Sam & Dave’s “Hold On, I’m Coming” and Albert King’s “Born Under a Bad Sign.”  Dunn even found the time to perform at the Monterrey Pop Festival in 1967, the event which catapulted Jimi Hendrix onto the national stage.  The core of the Stax musicians was the group Booker T and the MG’s with Cropper on lead guitar, Booker T. Jones on keyboards and Al Jackson on drums.  The band was enormously successful but disbanded in the early 70’s.  From time to time, the members would reunite periodically but without Jackson who was gunned down in 1975.  In 1980, Cropper and Dunn appeared in “The Blues Brothers,” backing up the Elwood brothers (John Belushi and Dan Aykroyd) as well as in the lesser sequel “Blue Brothers 2000.” (1998).  Dunn was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1992 and later received a lifetime achievement award Grammy Award in 2007.

Although Dunn’s contributions to rock and R&B could fill a truck, perhaps the best taste of what he and the MG’s were capable of creating can be appreciated here as the group performs their second-best number “Time is Tight,” bested only by “Green Onions.”  Ironically, the latter song, the group’s biggest hit, was cut before Dunn hooked on as the group’s bassist.

Dunn was born in Memphis on November 24, 1941 and acquired his nickname as a child.  He and Cropper, who was a boyhood friend, began playing guitar together even before they turned teenagers.  Dunn liked to tell others that he picked up the bass and began to play because it had less strings than a regular guitar.  He passed on from this life in his sleep after having played a gig at the Tokyo Blue Note with a Stax alumni band.

There is a slew of new movies hitting the multiplexes across the country this summer.  These reflect, in my opinion, some of the better choices along the way.  Unfortunately for us here in the Panhandle, it is doubtful that the bulk of these will see the light of a digital projector here.  Nevertheless, that’s what Netflix and DVDs are all about. However, should you get the chance to watch on the big screen, here’s a sampling of recent releases in the coming summer months.

MAY

A Little Bit of Heaven - Kate Hudson plays a single woman in New Orleans who finds herself falling for her doctor.  From the limited information I have, can’t figure out if this is a rom-com, seriocomedy-drama or what.  Gael Garcia Bernal plays the sawbones.

Dark Shadows - One of the hardest working men in show business (no, not Kenny Rogers) - Johnny Depp - turns up here as Barnabas Collins, freed after having spent hundreds of years in a crypt.  He feasts on the sights, sounds and throats of America set in the glorious year of 1972.  Tim Burton directs this send-up of the classic daytime TV gothic soap hit which originally ran from 1966-1971.  The cast also includes such stalwarts as Michelle Pfeiffer, Helena Bonham Carter, Jackie Earle Haley and Choe Grace Moretz.

God Bless America - A middle-aged man who may be suffering from a terminal illness teams up with a disaffected punk to rid this nation of some of its more disgusting, annoying citizens.  Joel Murray plays the man; Tara Lynne Barr the kid.  Bobcat Goldthwait wrote and directed.  What I’m most curious about is just who are these most irritating citizens and what criteria do our anti-heroes use to determine who dies.

Hick - Chloe Grace Moretz, fresh off her supporting role in “Dark Shadows,” plays the title role as a 13-year old who flees the hell of her dynfunctional family and heads west to Los Angeles in search of what else? - fame and fortune.  With Blake Lively, Eddie Redmayne and venerable Alec Baldwin.

Tonight You’re Mine - Two indie rock musicians, by some strange occurrence, find themselves handcuffed together backstage after a fight at a Scottish rock festival.  The show, of course, must go on with the usual, expected difficulties, twists, turns and contortions.  Natalie Tena and Luke Treadaway plays the rockers.

The Dictator - Sasha Baron Cohen (”Borat” and “Bruno”) is back as the brash, arrogant, dangerous Qaddafi-Hussein-like dictator who comes to America.  The results are predictable and very, very funny.  This is Cohen’s first attempt at traditional comedy with a set script and a cast of professional actors, a far cry from the attack comedy he was so successful with in his two prior films.  Directed by Larry Charles who worked with Cohen on “Borat” and “Bruno.”  Ben Kingsley co-stars. Read the rest of this entry »

If you’re in show business and have the last name Bogart, you’d better be good at whatever you do.  So it was with Paul Bogart, a venerable director of both movies and sitcoms who died this past Sunday in Chapel  Hill, North Carolina at the age of 92.  Bogart was recognized by many critics as the preeminent television sitcom director who guided many, many distinguished actors through episodes of “All in the Family,” “The Defenders” and “Get Smart.”  He also produced many series, among the most successful being “The Golden Girls.”  So talented Bogart was that by the early 80’s, he was considered to be America’s leading sitcom director. Recognizing that television direction simply doesn’t carry the luster of prestige that attaches to the cinema, Bogart was said to have quipped that the situation comedy is “held in low regard by everyone except those who watch it.”

Bogart’s talent wasn’t limited strictly to the television studio.  He also tried his hand at feature films, directing Bob Hope in his last film, “Cancel My Reservation” (1972) and James Garner as Phillip Marlowe in “Marlowe,” (1969).  The latter features a tough, savvy interpretation of Marlowe by Garner.  By his own admission, Garner converted the character he put together in “Marlowe” into the persona of James Rockford, made famous in the long-running NBC series “The Rockford Files.”  ”Marlowe” crackles with verve and sharp, acidic dialog.  It’s a very good, contemporary version of the 1949 Raymond Chandler classic “The Little Sister.”

Apparently, Bogart had the ability to work with just about any kind of actor, regardless of their tics, temper or tantrums.  Budd Schulberg, author of “The Harder They Fall” and the screenplay to “On the Waterfront” (1954) once described Bogart as an “actor’s director” and “a bearded Buddha with satyric eyes that conceal his philosophic gentleness.”

Perhaps Bogart will be best remembered for directing an episode of “All in the Family” titled “Edith’s 50th Birthday.”  First shown in October of 1977, it depicts an innocent Edith Bunker held hostage in her house by a rapist intruder.  At the time, many considered it to be one of the more shocking sitcom episodes ever to have been televised.  Even in the most dramatic moments of the episode’s 23 minutes, Edith’s naive nature and her innate reactions to the rapist manage to bring a laugh to the screen.  And don’t worry; in the final minute, Edith somehow talks the intruder into letting her remove her burning cake from the oven which she promptly mashes into the man’s grill, giving her time to escape out the front door.  She runs straight to Mike and Gloria’s house nearby where she throws herself into Archie’s arms.  It’s a nice touch and watching it again after 35 years, it still holds up.

For those of us who write for a living, the effective use of verbs makes one’s prose “walk the walk.” Ineffective, lazy choice of verbs condemns your writing to stifling yawns or worse, outright disgust.  Believe me, I experience this on a daily basis.  My epiphany occurred some years ago when I attended a one-day workshop in Plano, Texas on the subject of communication and instruction.  I think back and can’t remember why I chose to attend such a gathering but something in the brochure must have appealed to me. Nevertheless, I ponied up the money for the flight, rental car, hotel and tuition.  It was well worth all of it. Among a few factoids I walked away with (e.g. - the lecture format is the worst for imparting knowledge and understanding), the one which stands out was short, simple, honest and practical: when writing or speaking, train yourself to use more and more action verbs.  I aspire each day to achieve that pledge.

On a fundamental scale, verbs fall into two catagories: static (to be, to become, etc.) and dynamic (to strike, to rage, to pass, etc.).  The more pedestrian terms which come to mind are passive and active verbs. Whereas the passive verb allows the noun and its modifiers to take center stage in any given sentence, the active verb commands attention.  Indeed, with action verbs, the focus dramatically shifts to the drama set up by the use of a choice verb.  Now, I’m not condemning all passive verbs to perdition; simply the promiscuous use of them when action verbs can better convey the message or mood.  Some passive verbs work quite nicely at imparting a sense of well - sense - such as to feel, to taste, to see, to smell.  On the other hand, the existential verbs (I am, I was, I can, is being, might have been, etc.), even though they, like the poor, will always be with us, are better avoided when at all possible.  Just remember as you draft your brief, short story, great American novel, whatever - you’re no Shakespeare.  He can pull it off with his “to be or not to be,” but you most likely can’t.  (There, how was that for a satisfactory use of passive verb form.)  Then there are wimp verbs.  These are those kind of semi-qualifying verbs that stop short of commitment.  So when you describe a person or place as someone or something that appears to be . . . or seems to be . . ., you are using “wimp” verbs.  Use these at your own peril.

So what’s the deal with these “action” verbs?  If you’ll take a look at my “Triple Crown” page here on the Hacklawyer website, you’ll get a hint of the exotic flavor proper use of action verbs can provide.  Rather than describe how a horse “trailed the field and showed no speed in the stretch,” how about a sentence that describes how the horse “tarried but failed to answer when called upon to set down for a drive.”  I could have used another choice verb such as “dawdled” but “tarried” fit the bill nicely and conveyed the mental picture I desired.  In another example, I wanted to describe how two horses were running against each other, side by side, at the head of the pack.  I chose to use a rough-and-tumble verb “ding dong” rather than “running astride of each other.”  So, the sentences read like this: “Sent off at lights-out odds of 30-1, Reveron ran well enough to keep up down the backstretch with Take Charge Indy.  They ding-donged up to the top of the stretch when Reveron finally challenged TCI at the top of the lane.”  I think the added zest of the irregular verb makes the sentence.

These action verbs decrease reliance on other modifiers, such as adverbs or adjectives for that matter. That’s important because in writing, like anything else, it is usually in one’s interest to remember that less really is more.  These action verbs help the reader to envision the drama and activity unfolding on the page. And that’s why some of the best practitioners of the art of action verb use tend to be found among sportswriters and sports commentators.  They have to make repeated physical activity sound exciting and different, lest they lose the listener or reader.  For my money, some of the best uses of action verbs can be found in the prose that comes out of the track.

The point is that the use of pungent action verbs breathes new life into otherwise flaccid, dormant prose. But it takes work - real work - to make it happen.  The only way to determine if it can help your own writing is to start doing it.  Try to think of some other verb beside what usually comes into head and insert that choice. Write it and then step back, read it and sense the change in the texture and tempo of the sentence. As I said, the proper, intelligent, circumspect use of action verbs can make or break your writing.  If you earn your daily bread by dint of your fountain pen or keyboard, it’s a worthwhile endeavor.

In 1978, there was a blizzard of propositions that California voters had to contend with.  Many were downright nutty and completely over the top, such as the one which would ban gay teachers from the public education system.  That one failed miserably but Prop 7 sailed through.  And what was this proposition?  It greatly expanded the reach of California’s then-existing death penalty statute, making it just about the toughest in the country.

And as a result of the passage of this proposition, what does California have to show for it?  Well, it’s death row population has increased from 300 to over 720.  The state spends on average about $185 million a year on its own little cottage industry of habeas lawyers, expert witnesses, mitigation specialists, anti-death penalty groupies and so on.  Only 13 executions have been carried out over the past 34 years.  And as death cases continue to clog the appellate system, victims and most importantly, the families of slain victims, are forced to relive the pain of these crimes over and over again.

Enter Ron Briggs, a farmer and card-carrying Republican.  He calls the capital punishment system a “colossal failure” which “serves no effective purpose.”  This sentiment is not in and of itself newsworthy since many folks who once considered themselves strong “law and order” types have since changed their stripes on the subject of capital punishment.  They recognize that the problem with the death penalty goes beyond the moral arguments both for and against.  It has to do with the administration of the death penalty.  But Mr. Briggs’ involvement with the death penalty is newsworthy at this point in time since it was he, some 34 years ago, who championed Proposition 7.  He now regrets its passage and is presently involved in promoting a new proposition which would ban the death penalty in California and replace with it with mandatory life without parole.  Here’s what he has to say about the present state of affairs with capital punishment in the Golden State and what he hopes to achieve: Read the rest of this entry »

I am proud to announce that effective April 4, 2012, I have been named as Chief of the Appellate Division for the Randall County Criminal District Attorney’s Office.  It’s a fine public office with a bunch of good lawyers who genuinely get along with each other and a support staff that is more than just efficient.  Without them, the lawyers are nowhere.  And I’m grateful to my boss, D.A. James Farren. He is a great trial lawyer, an able administrator and generous to a fault with all the folks who labor under him.  He runs a fair office. Anyone who has done his or her share of criminal defense will attest to that undeniable fact.  I look forward to representing the State of Texas in the future and seeing to it, as trite as one may find the sentiment, that justice is done.  And the defense bar knows that my door is always open to talk, assist or listen.  Boy, if you had told me five years ago where I am today . . .

I’ve been meaning to write about this for most of this week but couldn’t get around to it until this morning. Last Sunday, Hero of Order won the Louisiana Derby, the Fair Grounds prestige race of the meet, rocking the tote board at odds of 109-1.  That makes for a payout of $220.80 on a mere $2 mutuel ticket.  Other payouts on the gimmick bets were astronomical.  For example, the $2 exacta paid $491.00, the double paid $996.50 whereas the Pick 3 paid a whopping $105,930.00  The Pick 4 paid nearly twice as much - $203,358.00.  I thought the field for the race was substandard as compared with previous runnings and the way that Hero of Order won the race confirmed my suspicions that this group of three-year olds simply didn’t measure up to performances in the other prep races across the country.  This is not a negative reflection on the classy racing over the course of the Fair Grounds meet which ended on Sunday with the running of the Derby and two other stakes races.  Hero of Order’s win, coupled with the lack of any standout performances by any other horse in the race and the pedestrian splits of the race, simply confirmed my fear that the field was not-ready-for-prime-time.  The runner-up, Mark Veleski at 3/2, earned $60,000 for his second place finish and that may be good enough to get him into a starting slot at Louisville since it brings his graded stakes winnings to approximately $260,000.  However, MV should have been able to pass a 109-1 shot and should have won that race.

As shocking as Hero of Order’s win was - and it was - the best part of the whole affair had to be the winning trainer’s statements to the media after the race.  His name is Gennadi Dorochenko, a Russian national who emigrated to this country in 1993.  He kicked around the leaky roof circuit for several years, earning money as an exercise rider and groom.  Track personnel and trainers who employed him recall him as a feisty, five foot two inch ball of energy who only knew two words of English - “thank you” and “hello” - but somehow managed to survive.  And survive he did.  He now commands a stable of nearly 150 horses and buys horses for some pretty rich Russian moguls who want to compete in American thoroughbred racing.  He’s had moderate success at various tracks over the last ten years and presently, bases his operation out of Arlington Park near Chicago.

Dorochenko is not without controversy.  In the late 90’s, he assisted his son in escaping this country and making it back to Russia to avoid a murder indictment out of California.  For that he was placed in jail for three months and put on three years probation.  Somehow he has managed to put this behind him since he is currently licensed in several states.  You know his criminal history had to be a major impediment to securing a license, considering how highly regulated horse racing is in most jurisdictions.  Guess he had a good lawyer to get past all of that.  So, no doubt the man is a colorful figure and what makes him even more “exotic” is that he hasn’t improved much with his command of the English language given the nearly twenty years he has been living in this country.  As proof, consider his comments to the press after the biggest win of his training career (and I quote word for irregular word):

“You see, I bought not expensive horses but I make these horses expensive.  We run horses together, Eddie [veteran rider Eddie Martin, the winning jockey] and me.  I told him exactly what he wants to do; he do and he wins.  Eddie is best jockey.  We are around horses together, I give him chance.  A lot of jockeys have ridden him [Hero of Order] and everything, but he do exactly what I tell him, he wins.”

I’m sure the blue bloods and hard boots of Kentucky just love hearing from a guy like this.  Whether or not Hero of Order will make it to the Kentucky Derby remains to be seen.  Because Dorochenko did not nominate the horse to the Derby, it will take a supplemental payment of $200,000 to get him to Churchill but even that won’t guarantee a starting berth.  The horse will only get to start should the connections pay the supplementary fee and less than twenty nominated horses actually are entered into the race.  Then and only then will the horse be given the opportunity to start.  And if that happens, I can assure you that as far as I’m concerned, the odds that he went off at in the Louisiana Derby are a good indication of what his price should be in the Kentucky Derby field.  That’s how weak I thought the Fair Grounds race really was.

There’s something that’s starting to bug me.  I know people are tired of hearing about it, tolerating it, watching it played out at night in prime time and in the end, getting beaten to death with it, but this election is already infected with the stain of racism.  You know what I’m talking about.  After three years of congressional obstinacy and various and divers instances of petty rudeness and misbehavior (Rep. Joe Wilson’s shouting “you lie” during one of Obama’s early appearances before Congress), you get the feeling that it’s really personal.  Guys like Wilson truly and really do not accept the legitimacy of the election of 2008.  They are firm in their moral opposition to anything and everything with Obama, about Obama and Obama himself.  Why?  How in God’s name did so many people get it wrong just a short three years ago? Their response, though not an answer, is fundamental demonstration of disrespect.

For example, how else to explain Speaker John Boehner’s rejection of President Obama’s request to speak to a joint session of Congress.  That has never been done before, ever in the history of the Republic.  What gives?  What about a crude comment volunteered by Republican Representative Jim Sensenbrenner, overheard at Reagan National Airport in Washington D.C.?  I’ll quote this piece exactly as it has been credited to Sensenbrenner: Read the rest of this entry »

There is an article in today’s NYTimes about HBO’s abrupt cancellation of its series on horse racing, “Luck.” The production boasted an experienced producer and writer with the credentials for success.  They in turn managed to sign up some heavy talent in two actors not known for their television work, Dustin Hoffman and Nick Nolte. And judging from some of the criticism I had read over the past two months and listening to word of mouth, the series was compelling in its manner of contrasting the beauty of Santa Anita racetrack with the desperation etched in the DNA of every hard bitten handicapper who has ever walked through the turnstiles at a paramutuel track.  Although the production had failed to garner the kind of buzz associated with other shows backed by HBO, the series had been given new life with a green light to shoot the second season.  Then came news of two breakdowns several months ago during the first season’s filming schedule. Then a third horse broke down just a few days ago.  That brought on the inevitable condemnation by PETA and other affiliated humane organizations.  The final statement released by HBO seemed to treat the entire affair as a failed experiment which should be chalked up to raw experience.  You can read it for yourself in the Times’ article and come to your own conclusions.  But here’s another take from my good friend and fellow handicapper Ron Brock out of Marshall, Texas.  RB is someone whose opinion in these kind of matters I trust.  Consider this:

“That wasn’t a post mortem from the New York Times; I’ll recite the post mortem as I see it.  The competing animal rights factions, PETA and the Humane Society (both media whores), put a gun to the show Luck’s head to get more poub for themselves and HBO walked the other direction while saying, in effect, “Go ahead and shoot.  This thing’s dead to me anyway.”  As with almost everything in this world, Rule 1 is always “follow the money.”  ”Luck” had a decent though not overwhelming following, but it failed to do the only thing HBO cared about . . . it did not produce incremental subscribers.  It had to go and better the animal rights activists be seen as killing it than the network.”

I think he’s dead-on.  And yet there’s one other reason underlying HBO’s lack of resolve in defending this worthwhile production.  Obviously, HBO looked at the program and the racing establishment as something, as a whole, not worth defending or certainly not worth going to mat over given PETA-induced hysteria.  And I say hysteria because most, if not all, of the comments made by these folks are simply ill-informed, naive, shortsided, impulsive, publicity-fueled and indicative of a group of folks who, for lack of a more moderate tone, are simply ignorant of the subject matter they condemn.  At least the phony televangelists and religious charlatans who rail constantly about sex do so from an experience-based perspective.  Racing for the most part, even to this day and with the benefit of slick, 24-hour coverage on TVG or HRTV Horse Racing networks, is still considered, erroneously, the bastion of lowlifes, crooks, schemers, con artists and betting coups.  HBO didn’t want to sully its hands anymore.

However, don’t completely count this thing out.  Not yet.  Some concepts die hard deaths.  You never know when or if someone else might come along with interest.  Stranger things have happened.  I mean, consider Rick Santorum.  He was the walking dead in late November and look at him now - a contender!  Unbelievable and only possible in the U.S. of A.