Identification of 2‐(ethylamino)‐1‐(4‐methylphenyl)‐1‐pentanone (4‐MEAP), a New “Legal High” Sold by an Internet Vendor as 4‐Methyl Pentedrone

Online vendors are offering a new legal high, 4‐methylpentedrone (4‐MPD). Information for potential users provided by internet vendors of 4‐MPD includes incorrect structures and nonexistent CAS numbers. A sample of 4‐MPD was obtained and analyzed using GC‐MS, NMR, and LC‐EIS. The fragmentation data from the GC‐MS and LC‐EIS produced an M‐1 ion that suggested the molecular mass was 219 amu, rather than 205 amu as calculated for 4‐methylpentedrone. The difference in molecular mass corresponded to the addition of a methyl group. Based on the mass and fragmentation pattern, two standards were synthesized, 2‐(ethylamino)‐1‐(4‐methylphenyl)‐1‐pentanone and 1‐(4‐methylphenyl)‐2‐(propylamino)‐1‐butanone. The synthesis involved bromination of the appropriate ketone followed by the reaction with ethylamine or propylamine. Based on the NMR data and unique fragmentation patterns produced by these molecules, the sample was identified as 2‐(ethylamino)‐1‐(4‐methylphenyl)‐1‐pentanone, not 4‐methylpentedrone.     

A theory of the spoils system

In a spoils system, it is axiomatic that ‘to the winners go the spoils.’ This essay formalizes spoils systems as cooperative games, with winners given by a simple game structure, and represented by a fixed number of political appointments. We analyze the resulting spoils games by means of the non-transferable utility value, and we offer two practical applications of the results.     

Provocation and Pluralism

What is the best way to reflect human diversity in the structure of the provocation defence, and similar excusatory defences in the criminal law? The House of Lords recently concluded that the right way is to allow the jury to personalise and thereby qualify the apparently uniform ‘reasonable person’ standard mentioned in section 3 of the Homicide Act 1957. In this paper we argue that this is not the right way at all. We argue that the reasonable person standard, unqualified, already accommodates the only variations between people that the law should want to accommodate in an excusatory defence. To defend this view we revive the common law's tripartite analysis of the ‘objective’ (or impersonal) issues in the provocation defence: first, was there an action capable of constituting a provocation? second, how provocative was it? and third, how much self‐control should have been exhibited in the face of it? We show that these questions each have a built‐in sensitivity to certain variations between different defendants' situations, but that this does not detract from their objectivity (or impersonality). We argue that no more sensitivity is needed in the name of human diversity, and what is more that no more sensitivity is desirable.     

IRAQ AND THE LESSONS OF VIETNAM: Introduction

Abstract

The following is the Introduction from a published collection of articles edited by Lloyd C. Gardner and Marilyn B. Young, Iraq and the Lessons of Vietnam: Or, How Not to Learn from the Past (New York and London: The New Press, 2007. 322pp. 978-1-59558-149-5). The book's Table of Contents appears on p. 486 below.

The specter of Vietnam has been buried forever in the desert sands of the Arabian Peninsula. — George H.W. Bush, 1991