Plasma versus bone marrow desipramine: a comparative study

Correlation between plasma and bone marrow tricyclic antidepressants has not been studied before. Two groups of rabbits were given 10 and 20 mg of desipramine/kg body weight, respectively. Desipramine was administered to the animals once daily by mouth for 5 days. On the fifth day the animals were sacrificed and blood and bone marrow samples were collected and analyzed using a high performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC) method. Data showed that a correlation exists between bone marrow and blood desipramine. The bone marrow desipramine concentration increased as its blood levels increased. The average ratio of bone marrow to blood desipramine +/- S.D. (standard deviation) in both dosage groups was 37.2 +/- 4.46 with a range of 30.99-44.82. This investigation is promising and shows that bone marrow could be used as an alternative tissue in the absence of a suitable blood sample.     

Recovery of decomposed and skeletal human remains in the "Green River Murder" Investigation. Implications for medical examiner/coroner and police

The Green River Murder Investigation in King County, Washington, is currently the longest active serial murder investigation in U.S. history. During its course, over 26 separate scenes with from one to five victims each have been processed. The experience of the authors is presented in order to acquaint other agencies with techniques of outdoor scene processing that have evolved during recovery of remains from Green River and other skeletal cases.     

Identification of the driver in two-rider motorcycle accidents. Inguinal contusion-laceration as an indication of the driver

In motorcycle accidents involving two riders, medicolegal identification of the driver is necessary when one or both riders die. It is particularly important in the latter case, because the survivor almost always insists that he or she was not driving. One characteristic injury that distinguishes the driver from the passenger is inguinal contusion-laceration (accompanied internally by pelvic fracture). This injury, caused by collision of the pelvis with the fuel tank, identifies the driver.     

General Deterrence and Corporate Environmental Behavior*

This research addresses the assumption that “general deterrence” is an important key to enhanced compliance with regulatory laws. Through a survey of 233 firms in several industries in the United States, we sought to answer the following questions: (1) When severe legal penalties are imposed against a violator of environmental laws, do other companies in the same industry actually learn about such “signal cases”? (2) Does knowing about “signal cases” change firms’ compliance‐related behavior? It was found that only 42 percent of respondents could identify the “signal case,” but 89 percent could identify some enforcement actions against other firms, and 63 percent of firms reported having taken some compliance‐related actions in response to learning about such cases. Overall, it is concluded that because most firms are in compliance already (for a variety of other reasons), this form of “explicit general deterrence” knowledge usually serves not to enhance the perceived threat of legal punishment, but as reassurance that compliance is not foolish and as a reminder to check on the reliability of existing compliance routines.     

Error minimization and deterrence in agency control

In the presented oversight model, in which a regulatory agency may collude with regulatees, a watchdog organization may scrutinize the agency’s decision-making and find evidence speaking for collusive behavior. Found evidence is of a specific, stochastic quality. Courts will overturn the administrative decision when the evidence presented in court exceeds a minimum quality standard set by the political principal. Lowering the quality standard increases the odds of finding evidence of sufficient quality and, hence, leads to increasing collusion deterrence and to a lower probability of acquitting collusive administrators (type I error), but also to a higher probability of convicting an innocent administrator (type II error). It is shown that, when welfare-maximization gives rise to an interior solution, the welfare-maximizing standard of evidence is lower than the one that merely minimizes the costs of legal errors without taking deterrence costs into account, but will imply incomplete deterrence. However, conditions can and will be identified under which both error cost minimization and complete deterrence coincide with welfare-maximization.