The realities of correctional officer misconduct and how to prevent it Term Paper - 1

The realities of correctional officer misconduct and how to prevent it - Term Paper Example The changes in the prison management system initially guaranteed safety for female inmates from the predatory sexual behavior of other inmates and male officers. While the system made necessary changes to manage the affairs inside the prisons, the incrimination of African American women continued to exist as they were considered less privileged than the white women. The socio-cultural disparity between the races that prevails in the American society also has made the female correctional staff of the African American communities to carry the images of their race as a sexually vulnerable. Smith (2012) also reveals that the male inmates and coworkers usually develop a negative stereotype in which female correctional staff are considered weak and sexually challengeable (p.1709). This particular scenario results in the moral degradation of female staff, a larger part of whom gradually succumbs to low self-esteem due to the continuous exposure to stress and sexual advances of men. Increasing cases of the involvement of female officers in moral corruption have considerably challenged the law enforcement system of the country. The complications of the corruption increases to new magnitudes as more and more cases involving officer-inmate relationships come to light. Most important fact to note is sex is an inevitable part of human life and the self-cont rol one possesses during the duty hours can only be deterrent that can prevent immoral activities related sexuality. There are numerous stories that report the incidents in which under trial detainees and prisoners falling in physical relationships with correctional staff. In a report, Duncan (2014) says that the love story of Batimore City Detention Center in which a correctional staff, Kirkland falls in love with an under-trial man, Loney, for whom the Kirkland smuggled contrabands and finally lands in

Examining The Sentencing And Punishment Of Crime Criminology Essay

Examining The Sentencing And Punishment Of Crime Criminology Essay A sentence is a formal judgment pronouncing a specific punishment to be imposed for the conviction of a crime. It may involve the payment of a fine, community service, incarceration, or in capital offenses, the death penalty (Barlow, 2000). It also may consist of a term of probation or parole (although parole has been abolished in many states). Sentences may be meted out directly following the entry of a verdict or at a sentencing hearing scheduled for a later date. In the interim, prosecutors prepare a sentencing report which advises the court of the defendants prior criminal record, aggravating or mitigating circumstances, and other information about the defendant that may assist the court in deciding an appropriate punishment. There have been concerted efforts over the years to standardize the approach toward sentencing, particularly in felony offenses, and to diminish judicial discretion in sentencing. These efforts reflect a recurring perception by lawmakers and the public at la rge that arbitrary or discriminatory practices may interfere with fair and just sentencing in certain cases or for certain crimes. This paper will discuss sentencing, punishment as well as mens rea and actus reus. Judges, not juries, determine punishments for a crime (in capital punishment cases, the jury usually decides whether to recommend death or life in prison). The Eighth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment provides that excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. In addition to the sentencing prohibitions contained in the Constitution, Title 18 of the United States Code, Part II (criminal procedure), Chapters 227 (sentences), 228 (death sentence), and 232 (miscellaneous sentencing provisions) also govern sentencing in federal courts (McAnany, August 2010). Most crimes are specifically enumerated in constitutions or statutes, and the provision that identifies the specific crime will also identify the appropriate punishment. For example, a statute may read, Violation of this statute constitutes a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not to exceed $500 or imprisonment not to exceed thirty days, or both. Given this range of potential punishment, a judge will then consider certain aggravating or mitigating circumstances to determine where along the prescribed spectrum a particular criminals punishment should fall. Common factors considered by judges include: whether the offender is a first-time or a repeat offender, whether the offender was an accessory (helping the main offender) or the main offender, whether the offender committed the crime under great personal stress or duress, whether anyone was hurt, and whether the crime was committed in a manner that was unlikely to result in anyone being hurt, whether the offender was particularly crue l to a victim, or particularly destructive, vindictive, etc., and (sometimes) whether the offender is genuinely contrite or remorseful (Stuntz, 2004). Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(a), before imposing a sentence, the court must afford counsel an opportunity to speak on behalf of the defendant. The court will address the defendant personally and ask him if he wishes to make a statement in his own behalf and to present any information in mitigation of punishment. The attorney for the government will have an equivalent opportunity to speak to the court. Similar provisions are contained in most state procedural statutes and rules. In many state courts, a victim or the survivors of a victim may also have the opportunity to address the court and recommend leniency or strictness for the sentence. Under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, the Three Strikes statute (18 U.S.C. 3559(c)) provides for mandatory life imprisonment if a convicted felon: has been convicted in federal court of a serious violent felony and has two or more previous convictions in federal or state courts, at least one of which is a serious violent felony. The other offense may be a serious drug offense. The statute goes on to define a serious violent felony as including murder, manslaughter, sex offenses, kidnapping, robbery, and any offense punishable by ten years or more which includes an element of the use of force or involves a significant risk of force (Schiraldi, Colburn, Lotke, 2004). The State of Washington was the first to enact a Three Strikes law in 1993. Since then, at least half of all states, in addition to the federal government, have enacted three strikes laws. The primary focus of these laws is the containment of recidivism (repeat offenses by a small number of criminals). Californias law is considered the most far-reaching and most often used among the states. In addition to three strikes laws, other state and all federal criminal statutes include mandatory sentences that require judges to impose identical sentences on all persons convicted of the same offense. Mandatory sentences are a direct result of state legislatures or Congress response to the public perception of judicial leniency or inconsistency in sentencing practices (Schiraldi, Colburn, Lotke, 2004). Most crimes do not carry mandatory sentences. When sentencing is not mandatory, the judge may fit the punishment to the offender instead of fitting the punishment to the crime. Current debates about criminal justice help to fuel the different approaches to sentencing and punishment. These approaches include the severity of punishment meted, and the specific objective sought by the punishment: retribution, some argue that the primary purpose of punishment should be to punish an offender for the wrong committed as opposed to societys vengeance against a criminal. The sentiment is to punish criminals and promote public safety by keeping them off the streets. Some believe that the primary purpose of punishment should be to rehabilitate criminals to change their criminal ways and to encourage the adoption of a more socially acceptable lifestyle. Most experts agree that this theory is commendable but not practical in prisons. Many criminals boast of coming out better criminals than they we re when they entered prison. Others argue that the perceived punishment for a crime should be so undesirable as to result in deterring someone from actually committing a crime for fear of the likely punishment. These theories are good, but many crimes are committed while the person is under the influence of alcohol and other drugs and the above mentioned approaches wouldnà ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚ ¢t help. Fear of punishment is usually not a deterrent under these circumstances (Hugo, 2010). Punishment is the imposition of something negative or unpleasant on a person in response to behavior deemed wrong by an individual or group. For a number of years, South Carolina operated under a fairly typical death penalty statute which provided for the ultimate penalty for a number of crimes including, but not limited to, murder, rape and kidnapping. The statute predicated the imposition of the death penalty in those situations where the jury made a finding of guilt without an affirmative recommendation of mercy (Hugo, 2010). Beginning in 1962, there was a moratorium on executions nationally even though the death penalty statutes remained in effect. In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Furman v. Georgia held that the imposition of the death penalty was unconstitutional in those situations where either the court or the jury had practically unfettered discretion to impose the ultimate penalty.    The Furman case, in effect, declared most death penalty statutes, including that of South Carolina, in effect to be unconstitutional (McAnany, August 2010). South Carolina joined thirty-four other states in changing their death penalty statutes to provide that under given circumstances the death penalty would be imposed mandatorily. Several people in South Carolina were sentenced under this statute, however, the judgment was not executed upon any prisoner and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, in 1976, that while the death penalty was not per se unconstitutional, Greg v. Georgia, that each individual case should be considered upon its merit and that the imposition of the death penalty pursuant to a mandatory statutory scheme was unconstitutional and violate of the Eighth Amendment. The court went on to say that the trier of fact, whether it is the court or a jury, should be allowed to take into consideration conditions in mitigation and aggravation prior to the imposition of the ultimate penalty. This, the court reasoned, would require a two phase hearing in which the jury made an initial determination of guilt or innocence and then the same jury reconvened to take additional testimony as to those conditions in mitigation and aggravation and made a determination as to the punishment, Woodson v. North Carolina (1976) (Stuntz, 2004). Prior to June 1995, Section 24-3-530 of the South Carolina Code of Laws provided that all persons receiving the death penalty shall suffer such penalty by electrocution. Subsequently, the General Assembly amended Section 24-3-530. Effective June 8, 1995, persons sentenced to death may elect to suffer such penalty by lethal injection. However, the election must be made in writing fourteen days before the execution date or it is waived. If the person waives the right of election and the sentence was imposed prior to June 8, 1995, the penalty will be administered by electrocution. If the person waives the right of election and the penalty was imposed on or after June 8, 1995, the penalty will be administered by lethal injection (Stuntz, 2004). Mens rea and actus reus are legal terms used to define a crime. Both Mens rea and actus reus must be present for an accused to be found guilty of a crime (except for strict liability). Mens rea means that the person must have had a guilty mind at the time of committing the crime. That is they must have intended to commit the crime. Actus Reus means wrongful act meaning that the person must have committed an act that is defined as wrong by law. Several common law jurisdictions define act differently but generally, an act is a bodily movement whether voluntary or involuntary. In Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a California law making it illegal to be a drug addict was unconstitutional because the mere status of being a drug addict was not an act and thus not criminal (Kendall, 2009). The sentence is the final act of a judge ruled process. A sentence usually involves imprisonment, a fine, or other punishments against a defendant convicted of a crime. Changes in sentencing law and policy, not increases in crime rates, explain most of the six-fold increase in the national prison population. These changes have significantly impacted racial disparities in sentencing, as well as increased use of one size fits all mandatory minimum sentences that allow little consideration for individual characteristics. The progress of civilization has resulted in a change in the theory and in the method of punishment. In the past punishment was left to the individuals wronged or their families, and was vindictive or retributive: in quantity and quality it would bear no special relation to the character or gravity of the offense. This paper discussed sentencing, punishment as well as mens rea and actus reus.

Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World :: essays papers

Brave New World Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World portrays a society in which science has clearly taken over. This was an idea of what the future could hold for humankind. Is it true that Huxley’s prediction may be correct? Although there are many examples of Huxley’s theories in our society, there is reason to believe that his predictions will not hold true for the future of society. One of the biggest changes occurring in Brave New World was that babies were not being born to parents, but rather being grown in test tubes. These test tube embryos were altered to produce thousands of babies using only one embryo. Our society practices similar procedures. We were first able to grow babies in test tubes, helping people who could not get pregnant. Our next development as a society allowed the ability to clone an embryo and have many where one stood. Another change in Huxley’s society was how people appeared physically as they grew older. In the story, people we given surgery to preserve their attractive peak for the rest of their lives. There is no surgery in our society that makes a person look good for the rest of their lives, but methods of slowing the aging process have been discovered. This new technology allows a person to look younger for a longer period of time. This means that a 60-year old person would look the same as a 30-year old would today. Despite the previously mentioned cases, there are examples of how today’s society is not changing to replicate Brave New World. In the story, there were no mothers or fathers, no family, and no general monogamy. Today’s society still believes in marriage, parental roles, and the family structure. The last difference is that of the government. In Brave New World, there were no political parties and no divisional boundaries. The story portrayed a society with a large group of intelligent leaders that controlled the society.

How Did the Europeans Affect the Native Americans? Essay

Anne Bradstreet Jonathan Edwards and Anne Bradstreet were both famous Puritan writers of their time. Each of their works, â€Å"Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God† and † Upon the Burning of Our House† convey to their audiences the strong religious beliefs prevalent during that time period. Edwards writes to persuade his audience. On the other hand, Bradstreet writes to inform her audience. Edwards mainly talks about hell and damnation in his writings, however Bradstreet talks about heaven and hope. Although both Edwards and Bradstreet have similar outlooks and understandings of religious beliefs and attitudes and beliefs about human life, there are also distinctions that allow the reader to better understand each author’s purpose. Bradstreet believes that one should look to God and pray during times of hardship. On the other hand Edwards believes that one should always look God, but not in times of hardship, he thinks people must let God come to them. Bradstreet expresses her needing of help from God after her house burns down when she said, â€Å"Raise up thy thoughts above the sky†(Bradstreet41). Referring to this quote Bradstreet looks up to God for help while she is in the middle of a crisis or hardship. Edwards suggests that people should let God come to them when he said, â€Å"And now you have an extraordinary opportunity, a day where in Christ has thrown the door of mercy wide Motahari 2 open, and stands in the door calling and crying with a loud voice to poor sinners†(Edwards129). According to this quote Edwards is saying that God has finally come to the sinners in their time of need. Not only are Bradstreet’s and Edwards’s religious beliefs different, but they also have different attitudes and beliefs. Bradstreet is a positive woman who believes that everyone is going to heaven, on the other hand Edwards is a negative man who believes that everyone is going to hell. Bradstreet expresses her positivity and belief for heaven after her house burns down while saying, â€Å"The world no longer let me love, my hope and treasure lies above†(Bradstreet119). This reveals that that she will always believe something good will happen. Even though her house and all of her things burned to ash, she still is happy that she has another home that lies above [heaven]. Edwards show his negativity towards people when he said, â€Å"In short, they have no refuge, nothing to take hold of†(Edwards126). Referring to this quote Edwards is trying to say that people do not have any escape from hell and damnation, also that there is nothing worth living for. Bradstreet and Edwards do not have the same views in the categories of religious beliefs and attitudes and beliefs of human life. Through her writings, Bradstreet explains that God is a kind loving person who is always there for us. However Edwards portrays God as a mean and angry person through his writings. I think that Bradstreet has a better view of God.

The Lenape Indians

Running head: THE LENAPE INDIANS The Lenape Indians Pennsylvania and Local History The Lenape Indians The Delaware River, named after Sir Thomas West, Lord de la Warr the governor of the Jamestown colony, flows from the Catskill Mountains in New York to the Delaware Bay along the borders of New Jersey and Delaware. The Delaware River meanders along and forms the boundary of present-day Pennsylvania and New Jersey. The first known inhabitants living along the banks of the Delaware River were the Eastern Woodland natives known as the Lenape Indians – sometimes called the Lenni Lenape or the Delaware Indians. Lenape stands for common or ordinary people and they called their land along the Delaware River Lenapehoking meaning Land of the Lenape (Kraft, 2005). At one time, the area known as Lenapehoking covered the southeastern portion of New York (including Staten Island and the western portion of Long Island), the southwestern portion of Connecticut, Eastern Pennsylvania, all of New Jersey, and the northeastern portion of Delaware along the Delaware Bay (Kraft, 2005). Evidence of the Lenape Indian’s presence in this geographic region dates back 3,000 years. The Lenapes first encountered the Europeans during the 16th Century. The discovered artifacts, the writings of the European settlers, and the stories passed down through the generations of Lenapes give us the story of the life and customs of the Lenape Indians as it was back during that time period. Two distinctly large groups of Lenape Indians, separated by geographic regions, made up what was known as Lenapehoking. The group of Lenape living north of what is today the Delaware Water Gap spoke a Munsee dialect and the group to the south spoke a Unami dialect (Lenape Lifeways, Inc, 2002). These two groups of Lenape Indians were organized into many bands which the Europeans called tribes. These small groups lived along the streams and rivers at the edge of the thick forests. In the northern Munsee group, the bands included the Raritan, Hackensack, Tappan, and Minisink Indians. The Unami group to the south consisted of the bands known as the Siconese, Mantaes, Remkokes, and Sankhikan Indians (Kraft, 2005). Each band of Lenapes had three separate clans also known as phratry – the turtle clan, the wolf clan, and the turkey clan. All Lenapes belonged to one of these three clans (Kraft, 2005). The extended families within each band were related through their mother. Clan membership was always passed down through the mother’s lineage. Each family group consisted of the mother and all her children and their children, the grandmother, and the mother’s brothers and sisters and their children. The Lenape married in their teens and were required to marry someone from a different clan. The new husband left his clan and moved in with his wife’s family. Their children and grandchildren always stayed with their mother’s clan (Grumet, 1989). The Lenape spent much of their time working out-of doors. This accounted for their tanned skin coloring and their muscular physique. The males spent their days hunting, trapping, and fishing. The men did the heavy work such as clearing the forests for their homes and gardens, building their shelters, and making tools out of stone and animal bones which were necessary for them to hunt, sew, and garden. All pieces of the animals they hunted were used for some practical tool, pieces of clothing or blankets, or decoration. The woman kept busy caring for the children, cooking, gardening, sewing, scavenging for food, herbs and firewood in the forests, and preparing food for storage. Their clothing was minimal in the warmer weather. When it got colder, both the males and females wore leggings, fur robes, and moccasins (Kraft, 2005) made from the hides of the animals they hunted. Their clothing was often decorated with seeds, shells, and paints. The Lenape were seasonal travelers and always returned to their homeland for the winter seasons. During the warmer weather they traveled to trade with the other bands in their region or with other Indian tribes in different territories as far away as the Carolinas and the Mississippi Valley (Grumet, 1989). They mostly traveled on foot following animal trails or streambeds. The Lenape traveled by water when the streams and lakes were not frozen. On water they traveled by dugouts which were a primitive type of the canoe. These dugouts were made from large trunks of trees. The Lenape would start a fire at a base of a tree to fell the tree, start a fire in the center of the tree trunk to soften it, and then use their handmade tools to dig out the ash from the center until it was hollowed out enough to float. In 1955, an 18 foot long chestnut dugout believed to be from the Lenape Indians circa 600-1700’s washed up from Lake Wallenpaupack in northeastern Pennsylvania during the flooding that occurred during Hurricane Diane. It is now on display at the PP&L Education Center in the Pocono Mountains. The Lenape Indians appointed a village leader they called the sachem who helped make decisions for the group. This was always a male who was deemed wise and skilled who received advice from the other village elders. He was knowledgeable about their religion and led the group in their rituals and ceremonies. When the Europeans arrived and met the Indians, they called these leaders the Indian Chiefs. This Chief was different from the war chiefs who were the tribe’s skilled hunters. Another leader in the Lenape village was the Medicine Man or Woman. This leader was knowledgeable in the various teas, herbs, and poultices that were used to heal the sick and wounded. In addition to the herbs, the Lenape searched the forest for wild fruits and berries. They cleared areas of the forests around their homes to be used for gardens. The main agricultural crops that they planted and harvested, known as the three sisters, were beans, squash, and corn or maize (Lenape Lifeways, Inc, 2002). Their shelters were either smaller wigwams or teepees which held two to three families or the much larger longhouses which were up to 60 feet long and held up to 25 people. The men built these shelters from many rows of saplings they bent to meet in the center to form a domed roof and then covered them with overlaying pieces of bark from chestnut or elm trees. There were no windows in these shelters; only a door at each end of the longhouse which was covered with animal skins to keep the cold weather out. Open fires were built inside the shelters for warmth and cooking; therefore openings were left in the domed roofs to allow the smoke to escape (Kraft, 2005). This is what the first Europeans were greeted with along the Delaware River valley when they arrived in the early 16th Century. The first outsider to see the Lenape Indians was the Italian explorer Giovanni da Verrazzano in the early 1500’s when he entered the Hudson Bay. His writings told of what the Lenape Indians looked like and how gentile they were (Grumet, 1989). The next group of Europeans to encounter the Lenape Indians was the Dutch settlers in early 1600’s. The Dutch traded furs with the Lenape for their more refined metal tools. As the trading expanded, the Europeans and the native Lenape soon engaged in hostilities. The Europeans were interested in the furs, mostly favored was the beaver fur, and the acquisition of the rich land that the Lenape inhabited (Lenape Lifeways, Inc, 2002). Other than trading, the Europeans introduced many diseases that the Lenape had no immunities to. These diseases consisted of smallpox, measles, mumps, and scarlet fever and they proceeded to devastate the native’s population. Warfare and the introduction of alcohol from the colonists further contributed to the decline of the Lenape population. Where once there were over 24,000 Indians residing in Lenapehoking; after the arrival of the Europeans, the population dwindled to less than 3,000 by the beginning of the 1700’s (Grumet, 1989, p. 34). The Lenapes’ other prized possession was the beads they created from the shells littering the coastal shores of Lenapehoking. The natives called these purple and white beads wampum and the Europeans used these as currency with the Indians (Grumet, 1989). As the Lenape depleted their crops and animals with their hunting and trading, they expanded their communities to the Ohio region in the 1600’s. Many of the Lenape Indians moved away from Lenapehoking across the Allegheny Mountains to the Susquehanna River valley to just distance themselves from the Europeans and because of the various land acquisitions and treaties that were signed. This westward migration of the Lenapes caused conflicts with other Indian tribes and continued conflicts with the Dutch settlers led to ravaged Indian and European communities (Grumet, 1989). These treaties and early sales agreements were signed by the Lenapes for the sale of their lands. One such infamous treaty was the 1737 Walking Purchase. William Penn’s sons, Thomas and James, wishing to increase their income through land sales, found an old treaty from 1686 that was never used. This treaty would grant to the proprietors of Pennsylvania as much Lenape land north along the Delaware River as far as a man could walk in a day and a half. In 1737, the Penn brothers convinced the then four Lenape Indian Chiefs to agree to hold to their end of this agreement that their forefathers had signed (Miller & Pencak, 2002). William Penn, a Quaker and founder of Pennsylvania, dealt fairly with the Indian natives, but his sons who took over after he returned to England began to accumulate more and more land and took advantage of the trust the Lenapes had formed toward the colonists when their father was there. Land was extremely important to the Lenape Indians, but the four Lenape Indian Chiefs thinking the treaty was a genuine treaty signed by heir ancestors, and figuring a man could only walk a short distance over that wilderness in a day and a half, agreed to honor the treaty. What ensued was that Penn’s heirs, hired the three fastest runners in the colony and had them run for the purchase on a well planned trail. The three runners started in what is today Wrightstown, New Jersey and the pace was so intense that only on e of the runners actually made it as far as what is today known as Jim Thorpe, Pennsylvania. This distance was about 70 miles and allowed the Penns to acquire roughly 1,200,000 acres of land in what was Lenapehoking. The area of land that was part of the Walking Purchase covers what is the size of the state of Rhode Island consisting of what is most of the present day counties of Pike, Monroe, Carbon, Schuylkill, Northampton, Lehigh, and Bucks. The four Lenape leaders felt that they had been swindled by the colonists but honored it because of the treaty they had signed (Walking Purchase, 2009). This forced the Lenape natives into the other areas of Lenapehoking causing over-crowding which also led to their migration further west. Today most of the Lenape Indians reside in Oklahoma and Canada but some still reside in their ancestral lands in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Nora Thompson Dean was believed to be one of the last known full-blooded Lenape Indians along with her brother Edward Leonard Thompson. Her Indian name was Touching Leaves and she lived her adult years in Oklahoma. Touching Leaves died in 1984 and her brother died in 2002. They belonged to the southern territory of Lenapehoking and were one of the few who could still speak the Unami dialect of the Lenape Indians (Rem, 1984). Today you can still find evidence of the life of the Lenape Indians through the artifacts discovered along the valleys and coasts of the Hudson and Delaware Rivers. The archaeological sites in the Delaware Valley have yielded many artifacts such as spearheads, arrowheads, knives, and remains of clay cooking pots that tell us of the culture of the Lenape Indians. Many streets, towns, parks and waterways bear the Lenape names in the Delaware River regions of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York. Some of these are Manhattan, Hackensack, Allegheny, Catasauqua, Cocalico, Conshohocken, Catawissa, to name a few (Lenape Lifeways, Inc, 2002). The Lenape tribe was considered to be one of the most advanced and civilized of all Indian tribes in Eastern United States. The Pocono Indian Museum in Bushkill, Pennsylvania is the home to many of these artifacts. Today there are Delaware Indian Reservations in Indian Territory in Oklahoma and two in Ontario, Canada. Only on these reservations does the government recognized the tribal governments. The Lenape elders continue to pass down their traditions and old ways to the newer generations. The Delaware Indians today continue to struggle to preserve their traditions and identities. There are over 13,000 Delaware Indians registered today and recognized by the United States and Canadian governments and many thousands more claim Delaware ancestry. Very few are able to speak their ancestors language (Grumet, 1989). The children on the reservations attend classes rich in the teachings of the arts and traditions of the Lenape ways. References Grumet, R. S. (1989). The Lenapes. (F. W. Porter, III, Ed. ). New York and Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers. Kraft, H. C. (2005). The Lenape or Delaware Indians (8th ed. ). Stanhope, NJ: Lenape Lifeways, Inc. Lenape Lifeways, Inc (2002). About The Lenapes. Retrieved November 29, 2009, from http://lenapelifeways. org/lenape1. htm Miller, R. M. , & Pencak, W. (Eds. ). (2002). Pennsylvania: A history of the Commonwealth. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Rem, J. (1984, December 1). Obit of Dean, Nora T. Bartlesville Examiner-Enterprise. Retrieved November 29, 2009, from http://files. usgwarchives. org/ok/washington/obits/d5000085. txt Walking Purchase. (2009). Retrieved December 4, 2009, from : http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Walking_Purchase