where did the tradition of godparents come from

As early as the 2nd century AD, infant baptism had begun to gain acceptance among Christians for the spiritual purification and social initiation of infants.[5] The requirement for some confession of faith necessitated the use of adults who acted as sponsors for the child. They vocalized the confession of faith and acted as guarantors of the childâ€™s spiritual upbringing.

Godparent

A godparent (also known as a sponsor),[1] in many denominations of Christianity, is someone who bears witness to a child's baptism, although the term has also been used in a legal sense.[2] In both religious and civil views, a godparent tends to be an individual chosen by the parents to take an interest in the child's upbringing and personal development, and to take care of the child should anything happen to the parents.[3][4] A male godparent is a godfather, and a female godparent is a godmother. The child is a godchild (i.e. godson for boys and goddaughter for girls).

Normally, these sponsors were the natural parents of a child, as emphasized in 408 by St. Augustine who suggested that they could, it seems exceptionally, be other individuals.[6] Within a century, the Corpus Juris Civilis indicates that parents had been replaced in this role almost completely.[7] This was clarified in 813 when the Council of Munich prohibited natural parents from acting as godparents to their own children.[8]

By the 5th century, male sponsors were referred to as "spiritual fathers", and by the end of the 6th century, they were being noted to as "compaters" and "commaters", suggesting that these were being seen as spiritual co-parents.[9] This pattern was marked by the creation of legal barriers to marriage that paralleled those for other forms of kin. A decree of Justinian, dated to 530, outlawed marriage between a godfather and his goddaughter, and these barriers continued to multiply until the 11th century, forbidding marriage between natural and spiritual parents, or those directly related to them.[10] As confirmation emerged as a separate rite from baptism from the 8th century, a second set of sponsors, with similar prohibitions, also emerged.[11] The exact extent of these spiritual relationships as a bar to marriage in Catholicism was unclear until the Council of Trent, which limited it to relationships between the godparents, the child, and the parents.[12]

Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin preserved infant baptism against the attacks of more radical reformers including Anabaptists, and with it, sponsors at baptism.[13] However, Luther strongly objected to the marriage barriers it created, Zwingli stressed the role of parents and pastors, rather than the "witnesses", in religious instruction, and Calvin and his followers tended to prefer the sponsors to be the natural parents.[14] A single godparent was retained in baptism at Geneva and among French Calvinists, but some followers of Calvin, most notably in Scotland and eventually the English colonies in America, rejected them altogether.[15]

In the early church, one sponsor seems to have been the norm, but in the early Middle Ages, there seems to have been two, one of each sex, and this practice has been largely maintained in Orthodox Christianity.[16] In 888, the Catholic Council of Metz attempted to limit the number to one, but proliferation seems to have continued.[8] In early 14th-century Spain, as many as 20 godparents were being chosen.[17] In England, the Synod of Worcester (1240) stipulated three sponsors (two of the same sex and one of the opposite), and this has remained the norm in the Church of England.[18] The Council of Trent attempted to limit the numbers of godparents to one or two, but practice has differed across the Catholic world.[19]

The Church of England, the mother Church of the Anglican Communion, retained godparents in baptism, formally removing the marriage barriers in 1540, but the issue of the role and status of godparents continued to be debated in the English Church.[20] They were abolished in 1644 by the Directory of Public Worship promulgated by the English Civil War Parliamentary regime, but continued to be used in some parishes in the north of England.[21] After the Restoration in 1660, they were reintroduced to Anglicanism, with occasional objections, but dropped by almost every dissenting church.[22] There is some evidence that the restored institution had lost some of its social importance as well as its universality.[23]

At present, in the Church of England, relatives can stand as godparents, and although it is not clear that parents can be godparents, they sometimes are. Godparents should be both baptized and confirmed (although it is not clear in which Church), but the requirement for confirmation can be waived. There is no requirement for clergy to baptize those from outside their parishes, and baptism can be reasonably delayed so that the conditions, including suitable godparents, can be met. As a result, individual clergy have considerable discretion over the qualifications of godparents.[24] Many "contemporary Anglican rites likewise require parents and godparents to respond on behalf of infant [baptismal] candidates."[25]

Lutherans follow a similar theology of godparents as Roman Catholics. They believe that godparents "help [children] with their Christian upbringing, especially if they should lose their parents".[26] Lutherans, like Roman Catholics, believe that a godparent must be both a baptized and confirmed Christian.[26] Some Lutherans also follow the Roman Catholic tradition that a Christian who is not affiliated with the Lutheran denomination may serve as a witness rather than a godparent.[27]

The Book of Discipline stipulates that it is the duty of a godparent, also known as a sponsor, "to provide training for the children of the Church throughout their childhood that will lead to a personal commitment to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, to an understanding of the Christian faith, and to an appreciation of the privileges and obligations of baptism and membership (Â¶ 225.4)." John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist Church, wrote a homily titled "Serious Thoughts Concerning Godfathers and Godmothers" in which he stated that godparents are "spiritual parents to the baptized, whether they were infants or [adults]; and were expected to supply whatever spiritual helps were wanting either through the death or neglect of the natural parents."[28] He described the role of godparents, instructing that they should call upon their godchild "to hear sermons, and shall provide that he(/she) may learn the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments, and all other things which a Christian ought to know and believe to his soul's health; and that this child be virtuosly brought up, to lead a godly and a Christian life."[28] As such, the Book of Worship states that godparents/sponsors should be "selected carefully" and "should be members of Christ's holy Church; and it is the duty of pastors to instruct them concerning the significance of Holy Baptism, their responsibilities for the Christian training of the baptized child, and how these obligations may be fulfilled."[29]

The Orthodox institution of godparenthood has been the least affected of the major traditions by change. In some Orthodox churches (Serbian, Greek) usually the best man (кум, koumbaros) or bridesmaid (kuma, кума, koumbara) at a couple's wedding act as a godparent to the first or all children of the marriage. In some instances, the godfather is responsible for naming the child. A godparent to a child will then act as a sponsor at the child's wedding.[30] Godparents are expected to be in good standing in the Orthodox church, including its rulings on divorce, and aware of the meaning and responsibilities of their role.[31] They cannot be a minor or a parent of the child, and at least one sponsor must be Orthodox.

In the Reformed tradition that includes the Continental Reformed, Congregationalist and Presbyterian Churches, the godparents are more often referred to as sponsors, who have the role of standing with the child during infant baptism and pledging to instruct the child in the faith.[32] In the bapismal liturgy of Reformed Geneva, "the traditional presence of godparents was retained".[33] John Calvin, the progenitor of the Reformed tradition, himself served as a godparent during forty-seven baptisms.[33] The Reformed Church in Geneva, in order to ensure confessional orthodoxy, "expected parents to select Reformed godparents."[34] Today, many Reformed churches invite parents to select godparents for their prospective neophyte, while other parishes entrust this responsibility to the whole congregation.[35][36]

The Catholic institution of godparenthood survived the Reformation largely unchanged. A godparent must normally be an appropriate person, at least sixteen years of age, a confirmed Catholic who has received the Eucharist, not under any canonical penalty, and may not be the parent of the child. Someone who belongs to another Christian church cannot become a godparent but can be a 'witness' in conjunction with a Catholic sponsor. A witness does not have any religious role recognized by the Church.[37]

In 2015, the Vatican declared that transgender Catholics cannot become godparents, stating in response to a transgender man's query that transgender status "reveals in a public way an attitude opposite to the moral imperative of solving the problem of sexual identity according to the truth of one's own sexuality" and that, "[t]herefore it is evident that this person does not possess the requirement of leading a life according to the faith and in the position of godfather and is therefore unable to be admitted to the position of godfather or godmother."[38]

In some Catholic and Orthodox countries, particularly in southern Europe, Latin America, and the Philippines, the relationship between parents and godparents or co-godparents has been seen as particularly important and distinctive.[39] These relationships create mutual obligations and responsibilities that may be socially useful for participants. The Portuguese and Spanish compadre (literally, "co-father") and comadre ("co-mother"), the French marraine and parrain, and the archaic meaning of the English word gossip (from godsib, "godsibling"), describe these relationships.[40] By extension, they can also be used to describe a friendship.

The Spanish and Portuguese words for the godparent roles are used for members of the wedding partyâ€”padrino/padrinho meaning "godfather" or "best man" and madrina/madrinha meaning "godmother" or "matron of honor", reflecting the custom of baptismal sponsors acting in this role in a couple's wedding.[41]

The Spanish custom was also adopted in the Philippines, a predominantly Christian country in Southeast Asia that was a former part of the Spanish Empire. The Filipino terms ninong for godfather and ninang for godmother, were also borrowed from Hispanic custom, and apply to godparents in both a child's Baptism and the child's later Confirmation. In the context of a wedding, the terms instead refer to the principal sponsors of the couple.

Godparents are noted features of fairy tales and folklore written from the 17th century onwards, and by extension, have found their way into many modern works of fiction. In Godfather Death, presented by the Brothers Grimm, the archetype is, unusually, a supernatural godfather. However, most are a fairy godmother as in versions of Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, and The Blue Bird. This feature may simply reflect the Catholic milieu in which most fairy tales were created, or at least recorded, and the accepted role of godparents as helpers from outside the family, but feminist Marina Warner suggests that they may be a form of wish fulfilment by female narrators.[42]

In the Yoruba religion Santería, godparents must have completed their santo or their Ifá. A person gets his Madrina and Yubona (co-godmother) or his Padrino and Yubon (co-godfather). A santero, aside from his co-godparents, may have an oluo (babalawo, initiate of ifa) who consults him with an ekuele (divinating chain).

There are two roles in the Jewish circumcision ceremony that are sometimes translated as godparent. The sandek holds the baby boy while he is circumcised. Among Orthodox Ashkenazi, the kvater (or kvaterin if female) is the person who takes the child from his mother and carries him into the room in which the circumcision is performed. Kvater is etymologically derived from the archaic German Gevatter ("godfather").

Some Chinese communities practise the custom of matching a child with a relative or family friend who becomes the godmother (乾媽) or godfather (乾爹). This practice is largely non-religious in nature, but commonly done to strengthen ties or to fulfill the wish of a childless adult to have a "son/daughter". In most circumstances, an auspicious day is selected during which a ceremony takes place, involving the godchild paying his/her respects to his new godfather/godmother in the presence of relatives or friends.[43]

Alternatively, as it is already common in Chinese kinship to use kinship terms among people that are not related (e.g. addressing a respected coworker as "brother" or one's father's friend may be referred to as "uncle"), an older friend or family friend with a deep friendship and a sufficient age gap will also informally address the other as his godparent or godchild, a gesture often initiated by the older person.


what does ky stand for in cayman islands

.ky is the Internet country code top-level domain (ccTLD) for the Cayman Islands.  Registration was limited to residents and registered companies in the Cayman Islands with a local address, but this restriction was removed in September 2015. The Cayman Islands also has the international three letter code, CYM, and has won a bid to be awarded the.cym domain[1] in a future expansion of the top level domain space.[2]

.ky

In January 2015 the Cayman Islands ICTA announced a partnership with Uniregistry for the operation of the.ky name extension. Uniregistry became the first ICANN accredited registrar to retail.ky names on March 2, 2015.

Registrations are permitted directly at the second level, or at the third level beneath these names:


who organized the august 1991 coup attempt in the soviet union

The 1991 Soviet coup d'état attempt, also known as the August Coup (Russian: Августовский путч, tr. Avgustovskiy Putch "August Putsch"), was an attempt by members of the government of the USSR to take control of the country from Soviet President and General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev. The coup leaders were hard-line members of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) who were opposed to Gorbachev's reform program and the new union treaty that he had negotiated which decentralized much of the central government's power to the republics. They were opposed, mainly in Moscow, by a short but effective campaign of civil resistance[8] led by Russian president Boris Yeltsin, who had been both an ally and critic of Gorbachev. Although the coup collapsed in only two days and Gorbachev returned to power, the event destabilized the USSR and is widely considered to have contributed to both the demise of the CPSU and the dissolution of the USSR.

1991 Soviet coup d'état attempt

Coup failed:

Supporting republics:[1] Azerbaijan Pridnestrovian SSR[2] Byelorussia Tajikistan Turkmenistan
Auxiliary party:
LDPSU[3]

Interfront movement:
 Intermovement
 IFWP
 Yedinstvo
 Unitate-Edinstvo

International support:[4][5][6]

Opposing republics:[1] Armenia Estonia Georgia Kazakhstan Kirghizia Latvia Lithuania Moldavia  Ukraine Uzbekistan

UNA-UNSO
 BPF "Renaissance"
 APFP

GKChP:   Gennady Yanayev Dmitry Yazov Vladimir Kryuchkov Valentin Pavlov Boris Pugo Oleg Baklanov Vasily Starodubtsev Alexander Tizyakov Republic leaders:   Ayaz Mutallibov Igor Smirnov Anatoly Malofeyev Qahhor Mahkamov Saparmurat Niyazov

Mikhail Gorbacheva Boris Yeltsin Ivan Silayev Konstantin Kobets Edgar Savisaar Ivars Godmanis Gediminas Vagnorius Levon Ter-Petrosyan Zviad Gamsakhurdia Nursultan Nazarbayev Askar Akayev Mircea Snegur Valeriu Muravschi Leonid Kravchuk Islam Karimov

After the capitulation of the State Committee on the State of Emergency (GKChP), popularly referred to as the "Gang of Eight", both the Supreme Court of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR) and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev described their actions as a coup attempt.

Since assuming power as General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1985, Gorbachev had embarked on an ambitious program of reform, embodied in the twin concepts of perestroika and glasnost, meaning economic/political restructuring and openness, respectively.[9] These moves prompted resistance and suspicion on the part of hardline members of the nomenklatura. The reforms also unleashed some forces and movements that Gorbachev did not expect.[citation needed] Specifically, nationalist agitation on the part of the Soviet Union's non-Russian minorities grew, and there were fears that some or all of the union republics might secede. In 1991, the Soviet Union was in a severe economic and political crisis. Scarcity of food, medicine, and other consumables was widespread,[10]  people had to stand in long lines to buy even essential goods,[citation needed] fuel stocks were up to 50% less than the estimated need for the approaching winter, and inflation was over 300% on an annual basis, with factories  lacking in cash needed to pay salaries.[11]
In 1990, Estonia,[12] Latvia,[13] Lithuania,[14] Armenia and Georgia had already declared the restoration of their independence from the Soviet Union. In January 1991, there was an attempt to return Lithuania to the Soviet Union by force. About a week later, there was a similar attempt by local pro-Soviet forces to overthrow the Latvian authorities. There were continuing armed ethnic conflicts in Nagorno Karabakh and South Ossetia.[citation needed]

Russia declared its sovereignty on 12 June 1990 and thereafter limited the application of Soviet laws, in particular the laws concerning finance and the economy, on Russian territory. The Supreme Soviet of the Russian SFSR adopted laws which contradicted Soviet laws (the so-called War of Laws).

In the unionwide referendum on 17 March 1991, boycotted by the Baltic states, Armenia, Georgia, and Moldova, the majority of the residents of the rest of the republics expressed the desire to retain the renewed Soviet Union. Following negotiations, eight of the nine republics (except Ukraine) approved the New Union Treaty with some conditions. The treaty would make the Soviet Union a federation of independent republics with a common president, foreign policy, and military. Russia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan were to sign the Treaty in Moscow on 20 August 1991.

On 11 December 1990, KGB Chairman Vladimir Kryuchkov, made a "call for order" over Central television in Moscow.[15] That day, he asked two KGB officers[16] to prepare a plan of measures that could be taken in case a state of emergency was declared in the USSR. Later, Kryuchkov brought Soviet Defense Minister Dmitry Yazov, Internal Affairs Minister Boris Pugo, Premier Valentin Pavlov, Vice-President Gennady Yanayev, Soviet Defense Council deputy chief Oleg Baklanov, Gorbachev secretariat head Valery Boldin (ru), and CPSU Central Committee Secretary Oleg Shenin into the conspiracy.[17][18]

The members of the GKChP hoped that Gorbachev could be persuaded to declare the state of emergency and to "restore order".

On 23 July 1991, a number of party functionaries and literati published in the hardline newspaper Sovetskaya Rossiya as a prime factor to an anti-Perestroika manifesto entitled A Word to the People.

Six days later, Gorbachev, Russian President Boris Yeltsin and Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev discussed the possibility of replacing such hardliners as Pavlov, Yazov, Kryuchkov and Pugo with more liberal figures. Kryuchkov, who had placed Gorbachev under close surveillance as Subject 110 several months earlier, eventually got wind of the conversation.[19][20][21]

On 4 August, Gorbachev went on holiday to his dacha in Foros, Crimea. He planned to return to Moscow in time for the New Union Treaty signing on 20 August.

On 17 August, the members of the GKChP met at a KGB guesthouse in Moscow and studied the treaty document. They believed the pact would pave the way to the Soviet Union's breakup, and decided that it was time to act. The next day, Baklanov, Boldin, Shenin, and USSR Deputy Defense Minister General Valentin Varennikov flew to Crimea for a meeting with Gorbachev. They demanded that Gorbachev either declare a state of emergency or resign and name Yanayev as acting president to allow the members of the GKChP "to restore order" in the country.[18][22][23]

Gorbachev has always claimed that he refused point blank to accept the ultimatum.[22][24] Varennikov has insisted that Gorbachev said: "Damn you. Do what you want. But report my opinion!"[25] However, those present at the dacha at the time testified that Baklanov, Boldin, Shenin, and Varennikov had been clearly disappointed and nervous after the meeting with Gorbachev.[22] With Gorbachev's refusal, the conspirators ordered that he remain confined to the Foros dacha; at the same time the dacha's communication lines (which were controlled by the KGB) were shut down. Additional KGB security guards were placed at the dacha gates with orders to stop anybody from leaving.

The members of the GKChP ordered 250,000 pairs of handcuffs from a factory in Pskov to be sent to Moscow[26] and 300,000 arrest forms. Kryuchkov doubled the pay of all KGB personnel, called them back from holiday, and placed them on alert. The Lefortovo Prison was emptied to receive prisoners.[20]

The members of the GKChP met in the Kremlin after Baklanov, Boldin, Shenin and Varennikov returned from Crimea. Yanayev, Pavlov and Baklanov signed the so-called "Declaration of the Soviet Leadership" in which they declared the state of emergency in all of the USSR and announced that the State Committee of the State of Emergency (Государственный Комитет по Чрезвычайному Положению, ГКЧП, or Gosudarstvenniy Komitet po Chrezvichaynomu Polozheniyu, GKChP) had been created "to manage the country and to effectively maintain the regime of the state of emergency". The GKChP included the following members:

Yanayev signed the decree naming himself as acting USSR president on the pretext of Gorbachev's inability to perform presidential duties due to "illness".[27] These eight collectively became known as the "Gang of Eight".

The GKChP banned all newspapers in Moscow, except for nine Party-controlled newspapers.[27] The GKChP also issued a populist declaration which stated that "the honour and dignity of the Soviet man must be restored."[27]

All of the State Committee on the State of Emergency (GKChP) documents were broadcast over the state radio and television starting from 7 a.m. The Russian SFSR-controlled Radio Rossii and Televidenie Rossii, plus "Ekho Moskvy", the only independent political radio station, were cut off the air.[28] Armour units of the Tamanskaya Division and the Kantemirovskaya tank division rolled into Moscow along with paratroops. Four Russian SFSR people's deputies (who were considered the most "dangerous") were detained by the KGB at an army base near Moscow.[17] The conspirators considered detaining Russian SFSR President Boris Yeltsin upon his arrival from a visit to Kazakhstan on 17 August, or after that when he was at his dacha near Moscow, but for an undisclosed reason did not do so. The failure to arrest Yeltsin proved fatal to their plans.[17][29][30]

Yeltsin arrived at the White House, Russia's parliament building, at 9 am on 19 August. Together with Russian SFSR Prime Minister Ivan Silayev and Supreme Soviet Chairman Ruslan Khasbulatov, Yeltsin issued a declaration that condemned the GkChP's actions as a reactionary anti-constitutional coup. The military was urged not to take part in the coup. The declaration called for a general strike with the demand to let Gorbachev address the people.[31] This declaration was distributed around Moscow in the form of flyers.

In the afternoon, the citizens of Moscow began to gather around the White House and to erect barricades around it.[31] In response, Gennady Yanayev declared the state of emergency in Moscow at 16:00.[23][27] Yanayev declared at the press conference at 17:00 that Gorbachev was "resting". He said: "Over these years he has got very tired and needs some time to get his health back."[23]

Meanwhile, Major Evdokimov, chief of staff of a tank battalion of the Tamanskaya Division guarding the White House, declared his loyalty to the leadership of the Russian SFSR.[31][32] Yeltsin climbed one of the tanks and addressed the crowd. Unexpectedly, this episode was included in the state media's evening news.[33]

At noon, Moscow military district commander General Kalinin, whom Yanayev appointed as military commandant of Moscow, declared a curfew in Moscow from 23:00 to 5:00, effective from 20 August.[18][28][31] This was understood as the sign that the attack on the White House was imminent.

The defenders of the White House prepared themselves, most of them being unarmed. Evdokimov's tanks were moved from the White House in the evening.[23][34] The makeshift White House defense headquarters was headed by General Konstantin Kobets, a Russian SFSR people's deputy.[34][35]

In the afternoon, Kryuchkov, Yazov and Pugo finally decided to attack the White House. This decision was supported by other GKChP members. Kryuchkov and Yazov's deputies, KGB general Ageyev and Army general Vladislav Achalov, respectively, planned the assault, codenamed "Operation Grom" (Thunder), which would gather elements of the Alpha and Vympel elite special force units, with the support of the paratroopers, Moscow OMON, the Internal Troops of the Dzerzhinsky division, three tank companies and a helicopter squadron. Alpha Group commander General Viktor Karpukhin and other senior officers of the unit together with Airborne Troops deputy commander Gen. Alexander Lebed mingled with the crowds near the White House and assessed the possibility of such an operation. After that, Karpukhin and Vympel commander Colonel Beskov tried to convince Ageyev that the operation would result in bloodshed and should be canceled.[17][18][19][36] Lebed, with the consent of his immediate superior, Pavel Grachev, returned to the White House and secretly informed the defense headquarters that the attack would begin at 2:00.[19][36]

While the events were unfolding in the capital, Estonia's Supreme Council declared at 23:03 the full reinstatement of the independent status of the Republic of Estonia after 41 years.

At about 1:00, not far from the White House, trolleybuses and street cleaning machines barricaded a tunnel against oncoming Taman Guards infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs). Three men were killed in the incident, Dmitry Komar, Vladimir Usov, and Ilya Krichevsky, while several others were wounded. Komar, a 22 year old veteran from the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, was shot and crushed trying to cover a moving IFV's observation slit. Usov, a 37 year old economist, was killed by a stray bullet whilst coming to Komar's aid. The crowd set fire to an IFV and Krichevsky, a 28 year old architect, was shot dead as the troops escaped. [37][23][35][38] According to Sergey Parkhomenko, a journalist and democracy campaigner who was in the crowd defending the White House, “Those deaths played a crucial role: Both sides were so horrified that it brought a halt to everything.”[39] Alpha Group and Vympel did not move to the White House as had been planned and Yazov ordered the troops to pull out from Moscow.

The troops began to move from Moscow at 8:00. The GKChP members met in the Defence Ministry and, not knowing what to do, decided to send Kryuchkov, Yazov, Baklanov, Tizyakov, Anatoly Lukyanov, and Deputy CPSU General Secretary Vladimir Ivashko to Crimea to meet Gorbachev, who refused to meet them when they arrived. With the dacha's communications to Moscow restored, Gorbachev declared all the GKChP's decisions void and dismissed its members from their state offices. The USSR General Prosecutors Office started the investigation of the coup.[19][31]

During that period, the Supreme Council of the Republic of Latvia declared its sovereignty officially completed with a law passed by its deputies, confirming the independence restoration act of 4 May as an official act.[40] In Tallinn, just a day after the resitution of independence, the Tallinn TV Tower was taken over by the Airborne Troops,  while the television broadcast was cut off for a while, the radio signal was strong as a handful of Estonian Defence League (the unified paramilitary armed forces of Estonia) members barricaded the entry into signal rooms.[41] In the evening, as news of the failure of the coup reached the republic, the paratroopers departed from the tower and left the capital.

Gorbachev and the GKChP delegation flew to Moscow, where Kryuchkov, Yazov, and Tizyakov were arrested upon arrival in the early hours of 22 August. Pugo committed suicide along with his wife the next day. Pavlov, Vasily Starodubtsev, Baklanov, Boldin, and Shenin would be in custody within the next 48 hours.[19]

Since several heads of the regional executive committees supported the GKChP, on 21 August the Supreme Soviet of the Russian SFSR adopted Decision No. 1626-1, which authorized Russian President Boris Yeltsin to appoint heads of regional administrations, although the Russian constitution did not empower the president with such authority.[42] It passed another decision the next day which declared the old imperial colors as Russia's national flag.[42] It eventually replaced the Russian SFSR flag two months later.

On the night of 24 August, the Felix Dzerzhinsky statue in front of the KGB building at Dzerzhinskiy Square (Lubianka) was dismantled, while thousands of Moscow citizens took part in the funeral of Dmitry Komar, Vladimir Usov and Ilya Krichevsky, the three citizens who died in the tunnel incident. Gorbachev posthumously awarded them with the title of Hero of the Soviet Union. Yeltsin asked their relatives to forgive him for not being able to prevent their deaths.[19]

Gorbachev resigned as CPSU General Secretary on 24 August.[19] Vladimir Ivashko replaced him as acting General Secretary but resigned on 29 August when the Supreme Soviet terminated all Party activities in Soviet territory. Around the same time, Yeltsin decreed the transfer of the CPSU archives to the state archive authorities, as well as nationalizing all CPSU assets in the Russian SFSR (which included not only the headquarters of party committees but also educational institutions, hotels, etc.).[42] Yeltsin decreed the termination and banning of all Party activities on Russian soil as well as the closure of the Central Committee building in Staraya Square.[42]

On 24 August, Mikhail Gorbachev created the so-called "Committee for the Operational Management of the Soviet Economy" (Комитет по оперативному управлению народным хозяйством СССР), to replace the USSR Cabinet of Ministers headed by Valentin Pavlov, a GKChP member. Russian prime minister Ivan Silayev headed this committee. On the same day the Verkhovna Rada adopted the Declaration of Independence of Ukraine and called for a referendum on support of the Declaration of Independence. The Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the third powerful republic in the union, also declared its independence the next day on 25 August which then established the Republic of Belarus.[43]

On 5 September, the Congress of People's Deputies of the Soviet Union adopted Soviet Law No. 2392-1 "On the Authorities of the Soviet Union in the Transitional Period" under which the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union had replaced Congress of People's Deputies and was reformed. Two new legislative chambers—the Soviet of the Union (Совет Союза) and the Soviet of Republics (Совет Республик)—replaced the Soviet of the Union and the Soviet of Nationalities (both elected by the USSR Congress of Peoples Deputies). The Soviet of the Union was to be formed by the popularly elected USSR people's deputies. The Soviet of Republics was to include 20 deputies from each union republic plus one deputy to represent each autonomous region of each union republic (both USSR people's deputies and republican people's deputies) delegated by the legislatures of the union republic. Russia was an exception with 52 deputies. However, the delegation of each union republic was to have only one vote in the Soviet of Republics. The laws were to be first adopted by the Soviet of the Union and then by the Soviet of Republics.

Also created was the Soviet State Council (Государственный совет СССР), which included the Soviet President and the presidents of union republics. The "Committee for the Operational Management of the Soviet Economy" was replaced by the USSR Inter-republican Economic Committee (Межреспубликанский экономический комитет СССР), also headed by Ivan Silayev.[44]

On 27 August, the first state became independent, when the Supreme Soviet of Moldova declared the independence of Moldova from the Soviet Union. The Supreme Soviets of Azerbaijan and Kyrgyzstan did the same on 30 and 31 August respectively. Afterwards, on 6 September the newly created Soviet State Council recognized the independence of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.[45] Estonia had declared re-independence on 20 August, Latvia on the following day, while Lithuania had done so already on 11 March 1990. Three days later, on 9 September the Supreme Soviet of Tajikistan declared the independence of Tajikistan from the Soviet Union. Furthermore, in September over 99% percent of voters in Armenia voted for a referendum approving the Republic's commitment to independence. The immediate aftermath of that vote was the Armenian Supreme Soviet's declaration of independence, issued on 21 September. By 27 October the Supreme Soviet of Turkmenistan declared the independence of Turkmenistan from the Soviet Union. On 1 December Ukraine held a referendum, in which more than 90% of residents supported the Act of Independence of Ukraine.

By November, the only Soviet Republics that had not declared independence were Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. That same month, seven republics (Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan) agreed to a new union treaty that would form a confederation called the Union of Sovereign States. However, this confederation never materialized.

On 8 December Boris Yeltsin, Leonid Kravchuk and Stanislav Shushkevich—respectively leaders of Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus (which adopted that name in August 1991)—as well as the prime ministers of the republics met in Minsk, the capital of Belarus, where they signed the Belavezha Accords. This document declared that the Soviet Union had ceased to exist "as a subject of international law and geopolitical reality." It repudiated the 1922 union treaty that established the Soviet Union, and established the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in the Union's place. On 12 December, the Supreme Soviet of the Russian SFSR ratified the accords and recalled the Russian deputies from the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. Although this has been interpreted as the moment that Russia seceded from the Union, in fact Russia took the line that it was not possible to secede from a state that no longer existed. The lower chamber of the Supreme Soviet, the Council of the Union, was forced to halt its operations, as the departure of the Russian deputies left it without a quorum.

Doubts remained about the legitimacy of the signing that took place on 8 December, since only three republics took part. Thus, on 21 December in Alma-Ata on 21 December, the Alma-Ata Protocol expanded the CIS to include Armenia, Azerbaijan and the five republics of Central Asia. They also pre-emptively accepted Gorbachev's resignation. With 11 of the 12 remaining republics (all except Georgia) having agreed that the Union no longer existed, Gorbachev bowed to the inevitable and said he would resign as soon as the CIS became a reality (Georgia joined the CIS in 1993, only to withdraw in 2008 after conflict between Georgia and Russia; the three Baltic states never joined instead going on to join the European Union and NATO in 2004.)

On 24 December 1991, the Russian SFSR--now renamed the Russian Federation--with the concurrence of the other republics of the Commonwealth of Independent States, informed the United Nations that it would inherit the Soviet Union's membership in the UN--including the Soviet Union's permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council.[46] No member state of the UN formally objected to this step. The legitimacy of this act has been questioned by some legal scholars as the Soviet Union itself was not constitutionally succeeded by the Russian Federation, but merely dissolved. Others argued that the international community had already established the precedent of recognizing the Soviet Union as the legal successor of the Russian Empire, and so recognizing the Russian Federation as the Soviet Union's successor state was valid.

On 25 December 1991, Gorbachev announced his resignation as Soviet president. The red hammer and sickle flag of the Soviet Union was lowered from the Senate building in the Kremlin and replaced with the tricolor flag of Russia. The next day, 26 December 1991, the Council of Republics, the upper chamber of the Supreme Soviet, formally voted the Soviet Union out of existence, thus ending the life of the world's first and oldest socialist state. All former Soviet embassies became Russian embassies while Russia received the nuclear weapons from the other former republics by 1996. A constitutional crisis occurred in 1993 had been escalated into violence and the new constitution adopted officially abolished the entire Soviet government.

On 1 November 1991, the RSFSR Congress of People's Deputies issued Decision No. 1831-1 On the Legal Support of the Economic Reform whereby the Russian president (Boris Yeltsin) was granted the right to issue decrees required for the economic reform even if they contravened the laws. Such decrees entered into force if they were not repealed within 7 days by the Supreme Soviet of the Russian SFSR or its Presidium.[42] Five days later, Boris Yeltsin, in addition to the duties of the President, assumed the duties of the prime minister. Yegor Gaidar became deputy prime minister and simultaneously economic and finance minister. On 15 November 1991 Boris Yeltsin issued Decree No. 213 On the Liberalization of Foreign Economic Activity on the Territory of the RSFSR whereby all Russian companies were allowed to import and to export goods and to acquire foreign currency (previously all foreign trade had been tightly controlled by the state).[42] Following the issuing of Decree No. 213, on 3 December 1991 Boris Yeltsin issued Decree No. 297 On the Measures to Liberalize Prices whereby from 2 January 1992 most previously existing price controls were abolished.[42]

The GKChP members and their accomplices were charged with treason in the form of a conspiracy aimed at capturing power. However, by the end of 1992 they were all released from custody pending trial. The trial in the Military Chamber of the Russian Supreme Court began on 14 April 1993.[47] On 23 February 1994 the State Duma declared amnesty for all GKChP members and their accomplices, along with the participants of the October 1993 crisis.[42] They all accepted the amnesty, except for General Varennikov, who demanded the continuation of the trial and was finally acquitted on 11 August 1994.[19]

Thousands of people attended the funeral of Dmitry Komar, Ilya Krichevsky and Vladimir Usov on the 24 August 1991. Gorbachev made the three men posthumous Heroes of the Soviet Union, for their bravery "blocking the way to those who wanted to strangle democracy.". [48]

In 1991 the Parliamentary Commission for Investigating Causes and Reasons of the coup attempt was established under Lev Ponomaryov, but in 1992 it was dissolved at Ruslan Khasbulatov's insistence.

During his vacation in Kennebunkport, Maine, the President of the United States, George H.W. Bush made a blunt demand for Gorbachev's restoration to power and said the United States did not accept the legitimacy of the self-proclaimed new Soviet Government. He returned to the White House after rushing from his vacation home. Bush then issued a strongly-worded statement that followed a day of consultations with other leaders of the Western alliance and a concerted effort to squeeze the new Soviet leadership by freezing economic aid programs. He decried the coup as a "misguided and illegitimate effort" that "bypasses both Soviet law and the will of the Soviet peoples."  President Bush called the overthrow "very disturbing," and he put a hold on U.S. aid to the Soviet Union until the coup was ended.[6][49]

The Bush statement, drafted after a series of meetings with top aides at the White House, was much more forceful than the President's initial reaction that morning in Maine. It was in keeping with a unified Western effort to apply both diplomatic and economic pressure to the group of Soviet officials seeking to gain control of the country.

Former President Ronald Reagan had said: "I can't believe that the Soviet people will allow a reversal in the progress that they have recently made toward economic and political freedom. Based on my extensive meetings and conversations with him, I am convinced that President Gorbachev had the best interest of the Soviet people in mind. I have always felt that his opposition came from the communist bureaucracy, and I can only hope that enough progress was made that a movement toward democracy will be unstoppable."[6]

On September 2, 1991, the United States re-recognized the independence of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania when Bush delivered the press conference in Kennebunkport.[50]

The British Prime Minister John Major had expressed feelings in a 1991 interview on behalf of the UK about the coup and said "I think there are many reasons why it failed and a great deal of time and trouble will be spent on analysing that later. There were, I think, a number of things that were significant. I donâ€™t think it was terribly well-handled from the point of view of those organising the coup. I think the enormous and unanimous condemnation of the rest of the world publicly of the coup was of immense encouragement to the people resisting it. That is not just my view; that is the view that has been expressed to me by Mr. Shevardnadze, Mr. Yakovlev, President Yeltsin and many others as well to whom I have spoken to the last 48 hours. The moral pressure from the West and the fact that we were prepared to state unequivocally that the coup was illegal and that we wanted the legal government restored, was of immense help in the Soviet Union. I think that did play a part."[51]

Major met with his cabinet that same day on 19 August to deal with the crisis. He added, "There seems little doubt that President Gorbachev has been removed from power by an unconstitutional seizure of power. There are constitutional ways of removing the president of the Soviet Union; they have not been used. I believe that the whole world has a very serious stake in the events currently taking place in the Soviet Union. The reform process there is of vital importance to the world and of most vital importance of course to the Soviet people themselves and I hope that is fully clear. There is a great deal of information we don't yet have, but I would like to make clear above all that we would expect the Soviet Union to respect and honor all the commitments that President Gorbachev has made on its behalf, he said, echoing sentiments from a litany of other Western leaders."[6]

However, the British Government had frozen $80 million in economic aid to Moscow, and the European Community scheduled an emergency meeting in which it was expected to suspend a $1.5 billion aid program.[49]


when is someone sentenced to the death penalty

It can be handed down for treason, espionage, murder, large-scale drug trafficking, or attempting to kill a witness, juror, or court officer in certain cases; but all inmates currently under federal death sentences were condemned for aggravated murder. Executions performed by the federal government are infrequent compared to those performed by state governments.[1][2]

Capital punishment by the United States federal government

Capital punishment is a legal penalty under the United States federal government criminal justice system.

The Federal Bureau of Prisons manages the housing and execution of federal death row prisoners. As of January 1, 2017, 62 offenders were on the federal death row, most of them at Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana.[3]

The Crimes Act of 1790 defined some capital offenses: treason, murder, robbery, piracy, mutiny, hostility against the United States, counterfeiting, and aiding the escape of a capital prisoner.[4] The first federal execution was that of Thomas Bird on June 25, 1790 due to his committing "murder on the high seas".[5]

The use of the death penalty in U.S. territories was handled by federal judges and the U.S. Marshal Service.

Historically, members of the U.S. Marshalls Service conducted all federal executions.[5] Pre-Furman executions by the federal government were normally carried out within the prison system of the state in which the crime was committed. Only in cases where the crime was committed in a territory, the District of Columbia, or a state without the death penalty was it the norm for the court to designate the state in which the death penalty would be carried out, as the federal prison system lacked an execution facility.

Capital punishment was halted in 1972 after the Furman v. Georgia decision, but was once again permitted under the Gregg v. Georgia decision in 1976.

The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 restored the death penalty under federal law for drug offenses and some types of murder.[6] President Bill Clinton signed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, expanding the federal death penalty in 1994.[7] In response to the Oklahoma City bombing, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 was passed in 1996. Federal Correctional Complex, Terre Haute became the only federal prison to execute people and one of only two prisons to hold federally condemned people.

In the late 1980s, Senator Alfonse D'Amato, from New York State, sponsored a bill to make certain federal drug crimes eligible for the death penalty as he was frustrated by the lack of a death penalty in his home state.[8] Prior to the 1990s bills, federal death penalty cases only covered crimes not in state criminal codes such as treason. Since the 1990s some federal death penalty laws cover acts already covered under state criminal codes.[9] However before 2001, federal attorneys had a policy stating that there would be no reason to seek a federal death penalty in a state that does not have its own death penalty, and until that point federal attorneys never pursued capital punishment in states without their own death penalties.[8] The policy was later abandoned and Marvin Gabrion, who committed his crime in Michigan, became the first post-Furman person in a non-death penalty state to receive the federal death penalty; he was sentenced on March 16, 2002. By October 2009 federal courts gave death sentences to eight other persons from non-death penalty states.[10]

Timothy McVeigh was executed on June 11, 2001, for his involvement in the Oklahoma City bombing where 168 people were killed. It was the first federal execution since 1963; it was broadcast on a closed circuit-television to survivors and victims' families.[11] Other executions by the United States include Juan Raul Garza on June 19, 2001, and Louis Jones Jr. on March 18, 2003. Sentences of death are now handed down by a jury, and the judge lacks discretion to reject the recommendation.[12]

The use of the federal death penalty increased in the 2000s, with the number of those sentenced to death federally climbing from 18 to 50 by 2007. Most such sentences were given in states which have active death state penalty statutes, with the largest number of federal death sentences handed down in Texas. However U.S. attorneys increasingly began pursuing death sentences in states with no state death penalties and/or with inactive state death penalties. In federal trials, courts may exclude jurors who are opposed to the death penalty, even in trials taking place in non-death penalty states.[8] In 2004 Brigham stated that due to an increase of federal death penalty verdicts in the preceding decade, "some fear a "federalization" of the death penalty is taking place".[2]

The two most recent offenders sentenced to death by federal courts are Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in 2015 for his role in the Boston Marathon bombing, and white supremacist Dylann Roof in 2016 for the Charleston church shooting where he killed nine people.

As of July 25, 2017, there are 61 offenders on federal death row, most of them at Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute, Indiana.[13] The only woman on federal death row as of 2017, Lisa M. Montgomery,[13] is held at Federal Medical Center, Carswell, in Fort Worth, Texas.[14] Aside from those at Terre Haute, three male death row inmates are held at ADX Florence, two are held at Springfield MCFP, and one is held at USP Beaumont. [15] Two people have been re-sentenced since 1976 to life in prison and one had the sentence commuted to life in prison by President Bill Clinton in 2001. In 2017, President Barack Obama commuted two death sentences, one handed down by a federal district court and one other issued by a court-martial.[16]

In the federal system, the final decision to seek the death penalty rests with the United States Attorney General. This differs from states, where local prosecutors have the final say with no involvement from the state attorney general.[17]

The sentence is decided by the jury and must be unanimous.

In case of a hung jury during the penalty phase of the trial, a life sentence is issued, even if a single juror opposed death (there is no retrial).[18]

While death row inmates sentenced by state governments may appeal to both state courts and federal courts, federal death row inmates may only appeal to federal courts; this gives them fewer avenues of appeal.[19]

The power of clemency belongs to the President of the United States.

These are the offenses punishable by life imprisonment or death under United States Code:[20]

The method of execution of federal prisoners for offenses under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is that of the state in which the conviction took place. If the state has no death penalty, the judge must choose a state with the death penalty for carrying out the execution.

The federal government has a facility and regulations only for executions by lethal injection, but the United States Code allows U.S. Marshals to use state facilities and employees for federal executions.[21][22]

Federal executions by lethal injection occur at United States Penitentiary, Terre Haute.[23]

Three executions (none of them military) have occurred in the modern post-Gregg era. This list only includes those executed under federal jurisdiction. Since 1963, three people have been executed by the federal government of the United States. All were executed by lethal injection at USP Terre Haute.

The assassinations of Lincoln and Garfield were prosecuted by the federal government because they took place in the District of Columbia. Guiteau's trial was held in D.C. court while the trial of the Lincoln conspirators was held in a special military tribunal. The assassin of William McKinley, Leon Czolgosz, was tried and executed for murder by New York state authorities. The accused assassin of John F. Kennedy, Lee Harvey Oswald, would presumably have been tried for murder by Texas state authorities had he not been killed two days later by Jack Ruby in the basement of the Dallas Municipal Building (then Dallas Police Department headquarters) while being transferred to the county jail. (Ruby himself was initially tried and convicted of murder in a Texas state court, but that was overturned by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and he died before he could be retried.) Only after Kennedy's death was it made a federal crime to murder the President of the United States.

The United States military has executed 135 people since 1916. The most recent person to be executed by the military is U.S. Army Private John A. Bennett, executed on April 13, 1961 for rape and attempted murder. Since the end of the Civil War in 1865, only one person has been executed for a purely military offense: Private Eddie Slovik, who was executed on January 31, 1945 after being convicted of desertion.


what happened at the end of endeavor season 3

In the final episode, Morse finally sits his Sergeant's exam and completes his paper well within the time allowed. An armed robbery takes place at a bank where Joan Thursday works and the armed robbers become trapped themselves along with Morse during an investigation into a killing and payroll robbery. After the robbers are arrested, Joan, emotionally affected by the ordeal, leaves Oxford for new pastures despite encouragement to stay from Morse. Realizing that Joan has gone, Thursday encounters Morse outside his house, and figures that he saw Joan leave. Thursday returns to his house and Morse follows him.

Endeavour (TV series)

Endeavour is a British television detective drama series. It is a prequel to the long-running Inspector Morse and, like that series, is set primarily in Oxford. Shaun Evans portrays a young Endeavour Morse beginning his career as a Detective Constable with the Oxford City Police CID. The series is produced for ITV as a Mammoth Screen[1] and Masterpiece co-production for ITV Studios. Following a pilot episode in 2012, the first series was broadcast in 2013, the second in 2014 and the third in January 2016. A fourth series was ordered by ITV, began filming in late spring 2016,[2] and premiered on 8 January 2017.

Set in mid to late 1960s Oxford, England, the series centres on the early career of Endeavour Morse (Shaun Evans) after he has left Lonsdale College of Oxford University late in his third year without taking a degree, spent a short time in the Royal Corps of Signals as a cipher clerk, and then joined the Carshall-Newtown Police.

In the pilot episode, having been transferred to CID after only two years as a uniformed police constable, the young DC Morse soon becomes disillusioned with law enforcement and begins writing a resignation letter. Before he can resign, Morse is sent with other detectives from the Carshall-Newtown Police to the Oxford City Police's Cowley Police Station to assist in investigating the case of a missing fifteen-year-old schoolgirl.

Having studied at Oxford gives Morse advantages and disadvantages when dealing with Oxford's "town and gown" divide. During the pilot episode, he tenders his resignation but his superior, veteran Detective Inspector Fred Thursday (Roger Allam), the "guv" at the Oxford City Police's CID, sees in him an unblemished detective whom he can trust and takes him under his wing to be his new "bag man" meaning assistant, replacing a corrupt Detective Sergeant.

Series 1 begins with Morse transferring to the Oxford City Police in 1965 following a double-murder investigation that took place during the pilot episode. Morse is taken under the wing of Inspector Thursday. Thursday names Morse his designated "bag man" and shows him the ropes as Morse begins to solve a string of complex multiple-murders, much to the envy and annoyance of some of his superiors, particularly Detective Sergeant Jakes and Chief Superintendent Bright. Morse displays his obvious genius in solving intricate murders, including several with opera connections. Thursday and fellow officer, Police Constable Strange, try to steer the young Endeavour into taking his Sergeant's exam, so that he may be relieved of "General Duties" and become Thursday's official "bag man" with the appropriate rank and title. In the Series 1 finale, Morse is shot while attempting to apprehend a murderer and is placed on light-duty. At the same time, Morse comes to terms with the death of his cold and unfeeling father in December 1965.

Series 2 begins in 1966 with Morse returning to active duty at Cowley Police Station, after spending several months on light duty at Oxfordshire (County) Police's Witney Station, under the direction of D.I. Bart Church. Morse is received warmly by C.S. Bright and D.S. Jakes, as D.I. Thursday begins to keep a more watchful eye on the young Endeavour. As a result of the shooting, Morse begins to suffer from delayed stress and paranoia, as well as an increase in alcohol consumption. Upon return to active duty, Morse is confronted first by three cases, which he tries to tie in together. Morse makes several mistakes in the investigation, but despite his errors, he solves the cases, impressing his superiors. During the investigation he suffers a concussion after being struck over the head and is cared for by his nurse neighbour, Monica Hicks, in whom he takes an interest. At the same time, P.C. Strange enters into Freemasonry with many of Oxford's elite, and D.I. Thursday's daughter, Joan, begins to take an interest in Endeavour. During the course of several cases, pieces of circumstantial evidence go missing, and a murder suspect threatens Morse by claiming association with powerful men who will not take kindly to interference.

In the final episode, the looming merger of city and county police and misgivings about corruption, lead Thursday to consider retirement, in response to strong hints from C.S. Bright about age and health. Disheartened by this, Morse speculates to Monica about leaving the police and going abroad with her. Assistant Chief Constable Clive Deare asks Thursday and Morse to covertly investigate corruption within the police and council. Morse is sent to a rendezvous where he is ambushed by corrupt officers and Thursday is lured to Blenheim Vale, a derelict former wayward boys home, where there was rampant sexual and physical abuse (of which Jakes was a victim). Morse escapes the ambush and goes to support Thursday, who is shot by Deare, a participant in the abuse at Blenheim Vale. Deare tells Morse he has framed him for the murder of Chief Constable Rupert Standish. Deare is about to kill Morse when he is shot dead by a girl who had also been abused at Blenheim Vale, who then kills herself. Bright and Strange show up with backup and an ambulance. As Thursday is being loaded into an ambulance, Morse is arrested by officers from another force for the murder of Chief Constable Standish. The series ends with Thursday's fate unknown and Morse in a jail cell.

Series 3 begins in Spring 1967. D.C. Morse has been cleared of the murder of Chief Constable Standish and the records in the case of Blenheim Vale are sealed for 50 years. D.I. Thursday has been discharged from hospital, but the bullet could not be taken out of him and has resulted in recurring coughs. Monica has come to realize that she and Morse have gone their separate ways. Strange has been promoted to Sergeant and Morse considers his future after his time in prison, but with Thursday's encouragement, Morse returns to active duty investigating a murder following a disappearance at a funfair on Cowley Green. After solving a faked kidnapping and tainted fruit being sold at a local supermarket, D.S. Jakes retires from the Force and leaves Oxford. Strange takes Jakes' place as Detective Sergeant but assures Morse that they're still friends even though he's now his superior. Detective Inspector Thursday shows frequent signs of outbursts against suspects unwilling to co-operate during the investigations, and even uses violence as a way of extracting information. Although Morse is unsure about becoming Sergeant, Thursday assures him he's more of an Inspector.

Starts in the summer 1967 and ends in the autumn of the same year. Joan Thursday is still away and Morse finds out his Sergeant's exam went "missing" which meant automatic failure.

ITV broadcast a television film in the UK on 2 January 2012; in the United States, PBS aired it on 1 July 2012. It starred Shaun Evans as the eponymous police detective in his early career.[3] Abigail Thaw, daughter of original Morse actor John Thaw, played the part of Dorothea Frazil in a scene at the Oxford Mail newspaper.

ITV commissioned a first series of four new episodes, filmed during summer 2012,[4] and aired them from 14 April to 5 May 2013.[5]

It was announced on 5 June 2013 that due to the success of Series 1, including consistently high ratings, ITV had commissioned a second series of four episodes.[6] Filming commenced in Oxford in September 2013.[7][8] On 24 September 2014, ITV confirmed that a third series of Endeavour had been ordered.

Before that third season of Endeavour screened on ITV, Evans told the Oxford Mail: "It's not like we have a six-year contract, there's none of that. It's day by day, year by year. I think this one is really good. We'll know when it airs if there's an audience for it and if we feel there's another place to take these characters."[9]

In February 2016, ITV announced that a fourth series of Endeavour had been commissioned, which Roger Allam confirmed to Oxford Mail,[10] with filming to begin in late spring 2016.[11] To mark the 30th anniversary of Morse on television, the series features several early Morse characters and cameos by actors from the original series.[12][13] The fourth series debuted on January 8, 2017, and it was announced the fifth season will be shown in 2018.[14]

A region 2 DVD of the pilot at 89 minutes long was released on 9 January 2012, but, as reviewers on Amazon.co.uk have noted, does not contain the full show and many scenes aired on ITV have been cut out.[15] A complete edition running at 98 minutes was released on 26 January 2012.[16]

Series 1 was released on DVD on 6 May 2013, Series 2 on 5 May 2014, and Series 3 on 1 February 2016.[17]

Noting that the series received upwards of 6.5 million viewers, Mark Sweeny writing in The Guardian stated that any decision to commission a subsequent series should be easy.[18] Upon its American premiere, Los Angeles Times critic Robert Lloyd called it a "suitably complicated and pictorially engaging work of period suburban mystery."[19]

Critics have been generally favourable,[20] though even positive reviews have commented that the show's murder-mystery plots are occasionally unsatisfying convoluted puzzles[21] or come to a "rushed, melodramatic and fairly preposterous conclusion."[22]

Endeavour includes a number of references to both Inspector Morse and Lewis.

A number of references to the Inspector Morse series were included in the TV film of Endeavour, serving to introduce younger versions of characters who appeared in the original series or to place iconic series or character elements into the film.

Among these are:


who plays peter in once upon a time

Robert Andrew "Robbie" Kay (born 13 September 1995) is an English actor whose credits include Fugitive Pieces, Heroes Reborn, Pinocchio, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, and Peter Pan in the Once Upon a Time television series.

Robbie Kay

Kay's family moved to the Czech Republic, where he saw a note for English-speaking children to be extras in a film on a school noticeboard. Despite a lack of previous acting experience, this led to him getting a speaking part in The Illusionist, but his scenes were eventually cut from the film.

After small roles in Hannibal Rising and My Boy Jack, the Canadian production company making Fugitive Pieces asked him to play the part of Young Jakob which involved a 9-week shooting schedule, three of which were on Greek islands.[2]

The people who made Fugitive Pieces had auditioned more than 150 boys before finding 10-year-old Robbie who had been living in Prague for two years.[3] He spent a year studying acting, singing, and dancing at one of Britain's Stagecoach theatre schools.[3] Kay appeared in a miniseries adaptation of Pinocchio, playing the title character.[citation needed] After finishing Pinocchio, he went on to play Sam, a boy diagnosed with leukemia in Ways To Live Forever screening in late 2010.[4] He appeared in Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, playing the Cabin Boy. More recently, he portrayed Peter Pan in Once Upon a Time.[5][6] [7]

In March 2015, Kay was cast as a high school student named Tommy Clark in the TV series Heroes Reborn.[8]

Kay's work has been generally well received by the critics. Alicia Cox of Chatelaine wrote on his work in Fugitive Pieces: "Robbie Kay, who plays the young Jakob, gives a remarkable performance with little words and a lot of emotion. When he smiles (which isn't often) you can't help but be affected."[9]

Kay was born in Lymington, Hampshire, England to Ivan and Stephanie Kay. He moved to Brussels, Belgium at an early age. He has two older sisters, Camilla and Fiona.[3]

In 2006, Kay and his family moved to Prague in the Czech Republic, where he attended the International School of Prague. He has been living in Houston, Texas since 2011.[10]


where did the mad cow disease come from

BSE is due to an infection by a misfolded protein, known as a prion.[3] Cattle are believed to have been infected by being feed meat-and-bone meal (MBM) that contained the remains of other cattle who spontaneously developed the disease or scrapie-infected sheep products.[3] The outbreak increased throughout the United Kingdom due to the practice of feeding meat-and-bone meal to young calves of dairy cows.[3][6] Cases are suspected based on symptoms and confirmed by examination of the brain.[1] Cases are classified as classic or atypical, with the latter divided into H- and L types.[1]

Bovine spongiform encephalopathy

Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), commonly known as mad cow disease, is a neurodegenerative disease of cattle.[2] Symptoms include abnormal behavior, trouble walking, and weight loss.[1] Later in the course the cow becomes unable to move.[1] The time between infection and onset of symptoms is generally four to five years.[2] Time from onset of symptoms to death is generally weeks to months.[2] Spread to humans is believed to result in variant Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (vCJD).[3] As of 2018 a total of 231 cases of vCJD have been reported globally.[5]

Efforts to prevent the disease in the UK include not allowing any animal older than 30 months to enter either the human food or animal feed supply.[4] In Europe all cattle over 30 month must be tested if they will become human food.[4] In North America tissue of concern, known as specified risk material, may not be added to animal feed or pet food.[7] About 4.4 million cows were killed during the eradication program in the UK.[8]

Four cases were reported globally in 2017 and the condition has been deemed to be nearly eradicated.[1] In the United Kingdom, from 1986 to 2015, more than 184,000 cattle were diagnosed with the peak of new cases occurring in 1993.[3] A few thousand additional cases have been reported in other regions of the world.[1] It is believed that a few million cattle with the condition likely entered the food supply during the outbreak.[1]

Symptoms are not seen immediately in cattle due to the disease's extremely long incubation period.[9] Some cattle have been observed to have an abnormal gait, changes in behavior, tremors and hyper-responsiveness to certain stimuli.[10] Hindlimb ataxia affects the animalâ€™s gait and occurs when muscle control is lost. This results in poor balance and coordination.[11] Behavioural changes may include aggression, anxiety relating to certain situations, nervousness, frenzy or an overall change in temperament. Some rare but previously observed symptoms also include persistent pacing, rubbing or licking. Additionally, nonspecific symptoms have also been observed which include weight loss, decreased milk production, lameness, ear infections and teeth grinding due to pain. Some animals may show a combination of these symptoms, while others may only be observed demonstrating one of the many reported. Once clinical symptoms arise, they typically get worse over the upcoming weeks and months, eventually leading to recumbency, coma and death.[10]

BSE is due to an infection by a misfolded protein, known as a prion.[3] Cattle are believed to have been infected from being feed meat and bone meal (MBM) that contained the remains of other cattle who spontaneously developed the disease or scrapie-infected sheep products.[3] The outbreak increased throughout the United Kingdom due to the practice of feeding meat-and-bone meal to young calves of dairy cows.[3][6]

Prions replicate by causing other normally folded proteins of the same type to take on their misfolded shape, which then go on to do the same, leading to an exponential chain reaction. Eventually, the prions aggregate into an alpha helical, beta pleated sheet, which is thought to be toxic to brain cells.

The agent is not destroyed even if the beef or material containing it is cooked or heat-treated.[12] Transmission can occur when healthy animals come in contact with tainted tissues from others with the disease. In the brain, the agent causes native cellular prion protein to deform into the misfolded state, which then goes on to deform further prion protein in an exponential cascade. This results in protein aggregates, which then form dense plaque fibers. Brain cells begin to die off in massive numbers, eventually leading to the microscopic appearance of "holes" in the brain, degeneration of physical and mental abilities, and ultimately death.[citation needed]

The British Government enquiry took the view the cause was not scrapie, as had originally been postulated, but was some event in the 1970s that was not possible to identify.[13]

Spread to humans is believed to result in variant Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (vCJD).[3] The agent can be transmitted to humans by eating food contaminated with it.[14] The highest risk to humans is believed to be from eating food contaminated with the brain, spinal cord, or digestive tract though any tissue may be involved.[15][16]

The pathogenesis of BSE is not well understood or documented like other diseases of this nature. Even though BSE is a disease that results in neurological defects, its pathogenesis occurs in areas that reside outside of the nervous system.[17] There was a strong deposition of PrPSc initially located in the Ileal Peyer’s patches of the small intestine.[18] The lymphatic system has been identified in the pathogenesis of scrapies. It has not, however, been determined to be an essential part of the pathogenesis of BSE. The Ileal Peyer’s patches have been the only organ from this system that has been found to play a major role in the pathogenesis.[17] Infectivity of the Ileal Peyer's patches has been observed as early as 4 months after inoculation.[18] PrPSc accumulation was found to occur mostly in tangible body macrophages of the Ileal Peyer’s patches. Tangible body macrophages involved in PrPSc clearance are thought to play a role in PrPSc accumulation in the Peyer’s patches. Accumulation of PrPSc was also found in follicular dendritic cells; however, it was of a lesser degree.[19] Six months after inoculation, there was no infectivity in any tissues, only that of the ileum. This led researchers to believe that the disease agent replicates here. In naturally confirmed cases, there have been no reports of infectivity in the Ileal Peyer’s patches. Generally, in clinical experiments, high doses of the disease are administered. In natural cases, it was hypothesized that low doses of the agent were present, and therefore, infectivity could not be observed.[20]

Diagnosis of BSE continues to be a practical problem. It has an incubation period of months to years, during which no symptoms are noticed, though the pathway of converting the normal brain prion protein (PrP) into the toxic, disease-related PrPSc form has started. At present, virtually no way is known to detect PrPSc reliably except by examining post mortem brain tissue using neuropathological and immunohistochemical methods. Accumulation of the abnormally folded PrPSc form of PrP is a characteristic of the disease, but it is present at very low levels in easily accessible body fluids such as blood or urine. Researchers have tried to develop methods to measure PrPSc, but no methods for use in materials such as blood have been accepted fully.[by whom?]

The traditional method of diagnosis relies on histopathological examination of the medulla oblongata of the brain, and other tissues, post mortem. Immunohistochemistry can be used to demonstrate prion protein accumulation.[21]

In 2010, a team from New York described detection of PrPSc even when initially present at only one part in a hundred billion (10−11) in brain tissue. The method combines amplification with a novel technology called surround optical fiber immunoassay and some specific antibodies against PrPSc. After amplifying and then concentrating any PrPSc, the samples are labelled with a fluorescent dye using an antibody for specificity and then finally loaded into a microcapillary tube. This tube is placed in a specially constructed apparatus so it is totally surrounded by optical fibres to capture all light emitted once the dye is excited using a laser. The technique allowed detection of PrPSc after many fewer cycles of conversion than others have achieved, substantially reducing the possibility of artifacts, as well as speeding up the assay. The researchers also tested their method on blood samples from apparently healthy sheep that went on to develop scrapie. The animals’ brains were analysed once any symptoms became apparent. The researchers could, therefore, compare results from brain tissue and blood taken once the animals exhibited symptoms of the diseases, with blood obtained earlier in the animals’ lives, and from uninfected animals. The results showed very clearly that PrPSc could be detected in the blood of animals long before the symptoms appeared. After further development and testing, this method could be of great value in surveillance as a blood- or urine-based screening test for BSE.[22][23]

BSE is a transmissible disease that primarily affects the central nervous system; it is a form of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, like Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease and kuru in humans and scrapie in sheep, and chronic wasting disease in deer.[24][14][25]

A ban on feeding meat and bone meal to cattle has resulted in a strong reduction in cases in countries where the disease has been present. In disease-free countries, control relies on import control, feeding regulations, and surveillance measures.[21]

In UK and US slaughterhouses, the brain, spinal cord, trigeminal ganglia, intestines, eyes, and tonsils from cattle are classified as specified risk materials, and must be disposed of appropriately.[21]

An enhanced BSE-related feed ban is in effect in both the United States and Canada to help improve prevention and elimination of BSE.[26]

The tests used for detecting BSE vary considerably, as do the regulations in various jurisdictions for when, and which cattle, must be tested. For instance in the EU, the cattle tested are older (30 months or older), while many cattle are slaughtered younger than that. At the opposite end of the scale, Japan tests all cattle at the time of slaughter. Tests are also difficult, as the altered prion protein has very low levels in blood or urine, and no other signal has been found. Newer tests[specify] are faster, more sensitive, and cheaper, so future figures possibly may be more comprehensive. Even so, currently the only reliable test is examination of tissues during a necropsy.

As for vCJD in humans, autopsy tests are not always done, so those figures, too, are likely to be too low, but probably by a lesser fraction. In the United Kingdom, anyone with possible vCJD symptoms must be reported to the Creutzfeldtâ€“Jakob Disease Surveillance Unit. In the United States, the CDC has refused to impose a national requirement that physicians and hospitals report cases of the disease. Instead, the agency relies on other methods, including death certificates and urging physicians to send suspicious cases to the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center (NPDPSC) at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, which is funded by the CDC.

To control potential transmission of vCJD within the United States, the American Red Cross has established strict restrictions on individuals' eligibility to donate blood. Individuals who have spent a cumulative time of 3 months or more in the United Kingdom between 1980 and 1996, or a cumulative time of 5 years or more from 1980 to present in any combination of countries in Europe, are prohibited from donating blood.[27]

The first reported case in North America was in December 1993 from Alberta, Canada.[28][29] Another Canadian case was reported in May 2003. The first known U.S. occurrence came in December of the same year, though it was later confirmed to be a cow of Canadian origin imported to the U.S.[30] The cow was slaughtered on a farm near Yakima, Washington. The cow was included in the United States Department of Agriculture's surveillance program, specifically targeting cattle with BSE[31]. Canada announced two additional cases of BSE from Alberta in early 2005.[32]
In June 2005, John R. Clifford, chief veterinary officer for the United States Department of Agriculture animal health inspection service, confirmed a fully domestic case of BSE in Texas.[33]

Soybean meal is cheap and plentiful in the United States, and cottonseed meal (1.5 million tons of which are produced in the U.S. every year, none of which is  suitable for humans or any other simple-stomach animals) is even cheaper than soybean meal. Historically, meat and bone meal, blood meal, and meat scraps have almost always commanded a higher price as a feed additive than oilseed meals in the U.S., so not much incentive existed to use animal products to feed ruminants. As a result, the use of animal byproduct feeds was never common, as it was in Europe. However, U.S. regulations only partially prohibited the use of animal byproducts in feed. In 1997, regulations prohibited the feeding of mammalian byproducts to ruminants such as cattle and goats. However, the byproducts of ruminants can still be legally fed to pets or other livestock, including pigs and poultry. In addition, it is legal for ruminants to be fed byproducts from some of these animals.[34] Because of this, some authors have suggested that under certain conditions, it is still possible for BSE incidence to increase in U.S. cattle.[35]

In February 2001, the US Government Accountability Office reported the FDA, which is responsible for regulating feed, had not adequately enforced the various bans. Compliance with the regulations was shown to be extremely poor before the discovery of a cow in Washington infected with BSE in 2003, but industry representatives report that compliance is now total. Even so, critics call the partial prohibitions insufficient. Indeed, US meat producer Creekstone Farms was forcibly prevented from conducting BSE testing by the USDA, which under an obscure 1913 law had the authority to restrict sales of BSE testing kits, allegedly to protect other producers from being forced to conduct the same tests to stay competitive.[36]

The USDA has issued recalls of beef supplies that involved introduction of downer cows into the food supply. Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Company was found to have used electric shocks to prod downer cows into the slaughtering system in 2007.[37]
Possibly due to pressure from large agribusiness, the United States has drastically cut back on the number of cows inspected for BSE.[38]

Japan was the top importer of US beef, buying 240,000 tons valued at $1.4 billion in 2003.[citation needed] After the discovery of the first case of BSE in the US on 23 December 2003, Japan halted US beef imports. In December 2005, Japan once again allowed imports of US beef, but reinstated its ban in January 2006 after a violation of the US-Japan beef import agreement: a vertebral column, which should have been removed prior to shipment, was included in a shipment of veal.

Tokyo yielded to US pressure to resume imports, ignoring consumer worries about the safety of US beef, said Japanese consumer groups. Michiko Kamiyama from Food Safety Citizen Watch and Yoko Tomiyama from Consumers Union of Japan[39] said about this: "The government has put priority on the political schedule between the two countries, not on food safety or human health."

Sixty-five nations implemented full or partial restrictions on importing US beef products because of concerns that US testing lacked sufficient rigor. As a result, exports of US beef declined from 1,300,000 metric tons in 2003, (before the first mad cow was detected in the US) to 322,000 metric tons in 2004. This has increased since then to 771,000 metric tons in 2007 and to 1,300,000 metric tons by 2017.[40][41]

On 31 December 2006, Hematech, Inc, a biotechnology company based in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, announced it had used genetic engineering and cloning technology to produce cattle that lacked a necessary gene for prion production â€“ thus theoretically making them immune to BSE.[42]

In April 2012, some South Korean retailers ceased importing beef from the United States after a case of BSE was reported.[43] Indonesia also suspended imports of beef from the US after a dairy cow with mad cow disease was discovered in California.[44]

With 36 confirmed cases, Japan experienced one of the largest number of cases of BSE outside Europe.[45] It was the only country outside Europe and the Americas to report non-imported cases.[46] Reformation of food safety in light of the BSE cases resulted in the establishment of a governmental Food Safety Commission in 2003.[47]

Cattle are naturally herbivores, eating grasses. In modern industrial cattle-farming, though, various commercial feeds are used, which may contain ingredients including antibiotics, hormones, pesticides, fertilizers, and protein supplements. The use of meat and bone meal, produced from the ground and cooked leftovers of the slaughtering process, as well as from the carcasses of sick and injured animals such as cattle or sheep, as a protein supplement in cattle feed was widespread in Europe prior to about 1987.[15] Worldwide, soybean meal is the primary plant-based protein supplement fed to cattle. However, soybeans do not grow well in Europe, so cattle raisers throughout Europe turned to the cheaper animal byproduct feeds as an alternative. The British Inquiry dismissed suggestions that changes to processing might have increased the infectious agents in cattle feed, saying, "changes in process could not have been solely responsible for the emergence of BSE, and changes in regulation were not a factor at all."[48] (The prion causing BSE is not destroyed by heat treatment.)

The first confirmed instance in which an animal fell ill with the disease occurred in 1986 in the United Kingdom, and lab tests the following year indicated the presence of BSE; by November 1987, the British Ministry of Agriculture accepted it had a new disease on its hands.[49] Subsequently, 177 people (as of June 2014) contracted and died of a disease with similar neurological symptoms subsequently called (new) variant Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (vCJD).[50][51] This is a separate disease from 'classical' Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease, which is not related to BSE and has been known about since the early 1900s. Three cases of vCJD occurred in people who had lived in or visited the UK – one each in the Republic of Ireland, Canada, and the United States of America. Also, some concern existed about those who work with (and therefore inhale) cattle meat and bone meal, such as horticulturists, who use it as fertilizer. Up-to-date statistics on all types of CJD are published by the National Creutzfeldt–Jakob Disease Surveillance Unit  in Edinburgh, Scotland.

For many of the vCJD patients, direct evidence exists that they had consumed tainted beef, and this is assumed to be the mechanism by which all affected individuals contracted it.[citation needed] Disease incidence also appears to correlate with slaughtering practices that led to the mixture of nervous system tissue with ground meat (mince) and other beef. An estimated 400,000 cattle infected with BSE entered the human food chain in the 1980s.[citation needed] Although the BSE epizootic was eventually brought under control by culling all suspect cattle populations, people are still being diagnosed with vCJD each year (though the number of new cases currently has dropped to fewer than five per year). This is attributed to the long incubation period for prion diseases, which is typically measured in years or decades. As a result, the full extent of the human vCJD outbreak is still not known.

The scientific consensus is that infectious BSE prion material is not destroyed through cooking procedures, meaning that even contaminated beef foodstuffs prepared "well done" may remain infectious.[52][53]
In fact the infectious agent remains viable over 600 °C (1,112 °F).

Alan Colchester, a professor of neurology at the University of Kent, and Nancy Colchester, writing in the 3 September 2005 issue of the medical journal The Lancet, proposed a theory that the most likely initial origin of BSE in the United Kingdom was the importation from the Indian Subcontinent of bone meal which contained CJD-infected human remains.[54] The government of India vehemently responded to the research, calling it "misleading, highly mischievous; a figment of imagination; absurd," further adding that India maintained constant surveillance and had not had a single case of either BSE or vCJD.[55][56] The authors responded in the 22 January 2006 issue of The Lancet that their theory is unprovable only in the same sense as all other BSE origin theories are and that the theory warrants further investigation.[57]

During the course of the investigation into the BSE epizootic, an enquiry was also made into the activities of the Department of Health Medicines Control Agency (MCA). On 7 May 1999, David Osborne Hagger, a retired civil servant who worked in the Medicines Division of the Department of Health between 1984 and 1994, produced a written statement to the BSE Inquiry in which he gave an account of his professional experience of BSE.[58]

In February 1989, the MCA had been asked to "identify relevant manufacturers and obtain information about the bovine material contained in childrenâ€™s vaccines, the stocks of these vaccines and how long it would take to switch to other products." In July, "[the] use of bovine insulin in a small group of mainly elderly patients was noted and it was recognised that alternative products for this group were not considered satisfactory." In September, the BSE Working Party of the Committee on the Safety of Medicines (CSM) recommended that "no licensing action is required at present in regard to products produced from bovine material or using prepared bovine brain in nutrient media and sourced from outside the United Kingdom, the Channel Isles and the Republic of Ireland provided that the country of origin is known to be free of BSE, has competent veterinary advisers and is known to practise good animal husbandry."

In 1990, the British Diabetic Association became concerned regarding the safety of bovine insulin. The CSM assured them "[that] there was no insulin sourced from cattle in the UK or Ireland and that the situation in other countries was being monitored."

In 1991, the European Commission "[expressed] concerns about the possible transmission of the BSE/scrapie agent to man through use of certain cosmetic treatments."

In 1992, sources in France reported to the MCA "that BSE had now been reported in France and there were some licensed surgical sutures derived from French bovine material." Concerns were also raised at a CSM meeting "regarding a possible risk of transmission of the BSE agent in gelatin products."[58]

For this failure, France was heavily criticised internationally. Thillier himself queried why there had never been a ban on French beef or basic safety precautions to stop the food chain becoming contaminated, suggesting "Perhaps because the French government forgot its role in guaranteeing the safety of food products, and this neglect cost the lives of nine people."[59] The Sydney Morning Herald added, "while blustering French politicians blamed Britain for the emergence of the disease  – and tried to quarantine the country by banning imports of British beef – they failed to adopt measures to prevent a hidden epidemic at home."[60]

In 2016 France confirmed a further case of BSE.[61]

In October 2015 a case of BSE was confirmed at a farm in Carmarthenshire in Wales.  This seems to be the last case reported in the media in the UK [62] Previous to this there were two confirmed cases in Wales in 2013. In the last 10 years England and Wales have suffered the following number of outbreaks per year: 2007 53 confirmed outbreaks, 2008 33 confirmed, 2009 9 confirmed, 2010 11 confirmed, 2011 5 confirmed, 2012 2 confirmed, 2014 1 confirmed, 2016 0 confirmed  [63]

In October 2018, a case of BSE was confirmed at a firm in Aberdeenshire, Scotland, the first such case in Scotland in a decade.[64] As of 18 October, the case was believed to be an isolated one, but four other animals from the same herd were being culled for precautionary reasons.[65] Scottish officials confirmed that the case had been identified as part of routine testing and that the diseased cow had not entered the human food chain.[66]

A number of other countries had isolated outbreaks of BSE confirmed, including Spain, Portugal, Belgium and Germany.[67]

The BSE crisis led to the European Union (EU) banning exports of British beef with effect from March 1996; the ban lasted for 10 years before it was finally lifted on 1 May 2006[68] despite attempts in May 1996 by British prime minister John Major to get the ban lifted. The ban resulted in trade controversies between the UK and other EU states, dubbed "beef war" by media.[69] Restrictions remained for beef containing "vertebral material" and for beef sold on the bone.[68] France continued to impose a ban on British beef illegally long after the European Court of Justice had ordered it to lift its blockade, although it has never paid any fine for doing so.[59]

Russia was proceeding to lift the ban sometime after November 2012 after 16 years; the announcement was made during a visit by the UK's chief veterinary officer Nigel Gibbens.[70]

It was successfully negotiated that beef from Wales was allowed to be exported to the Dutch market, which had formerly been an important market for Northern Irish beef. Of two approved export establishments in the United Kingdom in 1999, one was in Scotland – an establishment to which live beef was supplied from Northern Ireland. As the incidence of BSE was very low in Northern Ireland – only six cases of BSE by 1999 – partly due to the early adoption of an advanced herd tagging and computerization system in the region, calls were made to remove the EU ban on exports with regard to Northern Irish beef.[71]

Similar wildcat bans from countries known to have BSE were imposed in various European countries, although these were mostly subsequently ruled illegal. The Economist noted, "Unfortunately, much of the crisis in Europe can be blamed on politicians and bureaucrats. Even while some European countries were clamouring for bans on British beef, they were ignoring warnings from the European Commission about how to avoid the spread of BSE in their own herds."[67]

Different hypotheses exist for the origin of BSE in cattle. Two leading hypotheses suggest it may have jumped species from the disease scrapie in sheep, or that it evolved from a rare spontaneous form of "mad cow disease" that has been seen occasionally in cattle for many centuries.[72] In the 5th century BC, Hippocrates described a similar illness in cattle and sheep, which he believed also occurred in man.[73] Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus recorded cases of a disease with similar characteristics in the fourth and fifth centuries AD.[74]