Austin Criminal Defense Lawyer & Attorney : Jamie Spencer Law Firm : DWI, DUI, Drug Possession : Serving Georgetown, Round Rock, San Marcos, Travis, Williamson, and Hays County, Texas

We – the collective we that is, which somehow does not include me – we have lost our minds.

Man jailed when daughter fails to get diploma

CINCINNATI (AP) — A man ordered by a judge to make sure his daughter hit the books has found himself in jail because she failed to earn a high school equivalency diploma.

Brian Gegner, of Fairfield, was sentenced last week to 180 days in jail for contributing to the unruliness or delinquency of a minor.

He was ordered months ago to make sure his 18-year-old daughter Brittany Gegner, who has a history of truancy, received her GED — something that hasn't happened yet.

Brittany Gegner, who said Monday that she plans to take a required GED test this month, said her father shouldn't be blamed for her failure because she has been living with her mother.

There’s so much about this story that I don’t understand – it happened in Ohio, not my area of expertise, so to speak – that I tried to Snopes this, and otherwise de-verify it, or figure out that it was a practical joke. The story itself that is.

But no, it’s all over the blogs, this is from an actual AP story.

Honestly, I don’t know what’s wrong with us.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A private investigator that has access to the Austin Criminal Defense Lawyer’s Listserv sent an email out a few days ago (I usually link to folks to give them some Google Juice, but in this case, I’m doing the guy a favor by not doing that):

This is quite interesting, lets you know who and what to watch out for!  Try it.

Interesting facts about your neighbors.

PLACE  YOUR ADDRESS IN AND SEE THE CRIME IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD

OR

ANY OTHER ADDRESS IN THE U.S.A.

Felonspy.com - You need to know who your neighbors are. Especially if they're dangerous criminals

The email included a link to felonspy.com, which shows you certain felons living near you and what they were convicted of, when you type in your address.

I’d probably be able to claim that I’m a better person than I am had my interest not been piqued, but it’s kind of like slowing down to watch a car accident – I had to do it.

So after typing in my address, I take a look at some of the crimes felons near me have been convicted of:

• Attempted Gang Assault in the Second Degree
• Course of Sexual Conduct against a Child in the Second Degree
• Attempted Arson in the First Degree
• Attempted Manslaughter in the First Degree
• Aggravated Assault against a Person Less than 11 Years Old

Wow! Not only is my neighborhood crawling with felons, but they are all from out of state – none of these convictions make any sense at all under Texas law. I’m about to fire off an email to the Listserv saying I doubt the veracity of this site, and while writing it, I click back again so I can list off some of the supposed convictions.

Voila. Now living dangerously close to me are folks convicted of:

• Intimidating a Victim in the First Degree
• Attempted Promoting a Sexual Performance by a Child
• Unlawful Imprisonment in the First Degree
• Aggravated Sexual Abuse in the Fourth Degree
• Attempted Sodomy in the First Degree

Well, I’m glad all those bad guys living nearby moved out – and that it only took them 10 minutes or so to do it – but it’s a little odd that more bad guys moved in so quickly.

Just makes you wonder whether or not a credible private investigator might be able to figure out what’s going on here – even if they weren’t intimately familiar with the exact names and degrees of offenses in Texas. (If it need more explanation at this point: FelonSpy just randomly takes peoples names and ages and makes up offenses and ‘degrees’ and superimposes them over some sort of Google Map near your neck of the woods.)

By the time I had amused myself playing around with the site, several people had replied already. Someone pointed out that the site already had a listing on Snopes.com. My favorite comment came from one of the best criminal defense lawyers in Austin, Gerry Morris:

Is there a web site where I can go to make sure I don't live next to anyone who spends time looking up information about their neighbor's criminal histories?

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Blogging has been light, admittedly in part since I ‘discovered’ iTunes, but this favorite Tom T. Hall gem made me think about bologna sandwiches in the Travis County Jail. After being arrested for speeding while ‘sitting at a red light’, the narrator discovers the pleasures of what can only be small southern town 60s or 70s justice:

Well, they motioned me inside a cell with seven other guys
One little barred up window in the rear
My cellmates said if they had let me bring some money in
We ought to send the jailer for some beer

Well, I had to pay him double 'cause he was the man in charge
And the jailer's job was not the best in town
Later on his wife brought hot bologna, eggs and gravy
The first day I was there I turned it down

Well, next morning they just let us sleep but I was up real early
Wonderin' when I'd get my release
Later on we got more hot bologna, eggs and gravy
And by now I wasn't quite so hard to please

I sometimes ask clients what they were given to eat during their overnight stay at Downtown Travis County, and while the majority insist they weren’t in the mood to eat at all, many of them tell me it was bologna sandwiches, sometimes with cheese, sometimes with a small cup of jello.

My theory is that the Travis County Sheriff’s Office deliberately makes the stay unpleasant. My clients tell me they run into some recently arrested that act like they were there last weekend, and expect to end up in jail the week after that. 

I doubt the bologna has much effect on them. But for the others? You can beat the rap, but you can’t beat the ride.

• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks

My rough transcription – but possibly accurate, I rewound several times - from Obama’s Tuesday night victory speech:

[McCain’s] plan to win in November appears to come from the very same playbook that his side has used time after time and election after election.

Yes, we know what’s coming. I’m not naive. We’ve already seen it.

The same names and labels they always pin on everyone who doesn’t agree with their ideas. The same efforts to distract us from the issues that effect our lives by pouncing on every gaffe and association and fake controversy in the hopes that the media will play along.

The attempts to play on our fears and exploit our differences, to turn us against each other for political gain, to slice and dice this country into red states and blue states, blue collar and white collar, white, black, brown, young, old, rich, poor…

This is the race we expect… The question then is not what kind of campaign they will run…

It’s what kind of campaign we will run.

I’ve been a politics watcher for a long time now, and frankly I’ve gotten more and more cynical with each passing election cycle. Without even realizing it, over time I came to believe that no one ever could change the tone in Washington – or would even try.

Ah, but I was so much older then, I’m younger than that now…

• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

AKA the phrase you’ll never see written in an appellate decision or hear spoken out loud.

Gideon’s post about the fifth consecutive failed attempt by Connecticut’s legislature to pass an open container law got me thinking:

So, come to CT, where you can drink and drive (just not drunk and driving).

Well, in Texas we do indeed have an open container law, but we also have drive through liquor stores. Go figure. That’s got to be illegal in (most? perhaps all?) other parts of the country.

Anyone?

Update: A little googling and I find that Fox Noise reports that Texas is not alone. At least we were the first, and apparently the best at it. (Everything’s bigger in Texas.)

Texas boasts the most drive-thru liquor stores in the country. And despite legal controversy for drinking-and-driving-related reasons, they have also popped up in Maryland, Louisiana, Arizona and Hawaii, to name a few.

• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

Houston defense lawyer Mark Bennett bemoans other lawyers reacting to this story before he can:

Lots of folks had something to say about this:

Grits, Dallas Criminal Defense Lawyer Robert Guest, Fort Worth criminal defense lawyer Shawn Matlock, Connecticut public defender Gideon, and New York criminal defense lawyer Scott Greenfield.

Ordinarily you would think that by the time the Connecticut and New York bloggers got to a Texas topic it would be as dead as Eight Belles and not in need of further flogging.

But the two Gs are on top of things, so their posts never scare me off. I though of an angle — how are the prosecutors on the TDCAA forums reacting? — only to find that Wise County, Texas criminal defense lawyer Barry Green had beaten me to it. Bryan, Texas criminal defense lawyer Stephen Gustitis went there, too.

[Boy, if that wasn’t the cheesiest way to link to a bunch of folks without doing any real work myself…]

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

This is an experiment. OK – it’s a Cinco de Mayo fueled experiment.

There’s some odd bloglike but not quite a blog site out there named NorthLoop Neighborhoods that seems to cut and paste pieces of ACDL and post them without comment.

I’m posting this at 11:16 P.M. to see whether NorthLoop Neighborhoods picks it up, and if it does, how quickly it does it.

Update: It took about 45 minutes for NorthLoop to post this.

• Print
• Comments (5)
• Trackbacks

One day before the fifth anniversary of “Mission Accomplished” the Dean of White House reporters Helen Thomas and White House Spokesperson Dana Perino last Wednesday at a press conference:

MS. THOMAS: How does the President intend to commemorate "Mission Accomplished" after five years of death and destruction?

MS. PERINO: What you're referring to is the banner that ran -- that was aboard the ship five years ago. President Bush –

MS. THOMAS: I'm talking about the anniversary tomorrow.

MS. PERINO: Yes, I get -- no, I understand. That's the anniversary of when that banner flew on that ship. President Bush is well aware that the banner should have been much more specific and said "mission accomplished for these sailors who are on this ship on their mission." And we have certainly paid a price for not being more specific on that banner. And I recognize that the media is going to play this up again tomorrow, as they do every single year.

That’s right. The president thought the banner was going to say:

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

(for the guys on this ship)

(pay no attention to my big airplane entrance)

(never mind the cameras and the media)

(this sign isn’t about the War in Iraq)

(it’s about a few hundred guys on this ship)

How was he to know that someone goofed and left out the fine print?

Seriously, I get lied to by clients on occasion, and frankly sometimes I expect it. It might take a few times before they feel like telling me what’s really going on in their case. Or for them to trust that I will work hard on their case no matter what the facts are.

But, I also get told outrageous lies at times. And it’s a little insulting. It’s not the “not being truthful with me” part that I mind; it’s the storyteller thinking I’m dumb enough to believe this particular load of garbage. How dumb do you think I am?

By the same token, I’m used to politicians – and their spokespeople - being shall we say less than truthful. But can anyone tell me why Perino was allowed by the press to tell this ridiculous whopper totally unreported and unchallenged?

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Blogrolling ACDL… Thanks go out to the following blogs that have recently added permanent links, linked to me in a post of their own, linked to my DWI blog or commented on recent posts:

• Waco Criminal Law Blog
• Exposed
• Sex Crimes
• The Mommy Blog
• May It Please The Court
• Eye on Williamson
• Georgia DUI Law Blog
• Condo & HOA Law Blog
• Election Journal
• Georgia DUI Blog

And here are some other interesting blogs I’ve been following recently:

• Off the Kuff
• The Legal Satyricon
• Judgment Day
• Norm Pattis
• Hick Town Rap Star

As always, I’ve likely missed some folks, so please email me if you’d like to be included in the next edition of Austin Criminal Defense Blogrolling.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I often get asked by new criminal law bloggers how best to get noticed by other bloggers so that they can get linked to. Actually there’s an easy answer: link out to others, and they will start reading your blog and link back to you.

While you’re at it, feel free to let the person you’re linking to know it in an email. They may not have noticed (although, as you get more and more into blogging, you’ll start to recognize when folks do). Here’s an email exchange from a relatively new blogger that is already posting frequent high quality content:

Jamie,

I’ve just started a new blog, Mississippi Criminal Defense Law Blog, www.mscriminallawblog.com, and wanted to reach out to you for any advice or comments you might have on blogging on the topic of criminal law.  I’ve been reviewing your posts and with permission will start making some comments on a few in the future.  I have also linked to your sites on my blogroll – I hope that is okay.

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

--
Kevin W. Frye
Attorney at Law

My answer:

First and foremost, never ask permission to link to me: just do it!

Haha.  No, but seriously, thank you, and by the way, linking out to others is the best, quickest, easiest way to get them to notice you and to get them to link back to you.

And feel free to grab snippets of what folks say (yes, me included) and comment on why it is wrong as well as why it is 'right'.  It helps a little if I actually am wrong, but again, in the practical blawgosphere, that's more than welcome.

Blogging is a discussion - either in the comments section, or between blogs.

You've definitely got a good start.  I'll be linking to you in my next edition of "blogrolling" - if not before then.

Thanks for the email, and by the way, at the beginning, feel free to email folks when you link to them (you won't need to do it with me - I'm subscribing to your blog now, and I would have seen it anyway on Technorati) - but I mean don't feel bashful if you link to someone and you want them to know you did.

Finally, permission (and you should ask permission for this one) to reprint your email to me?  And my response to you?  I'll include a link about your new blog of course, but probably post it as "advice to new criminal defense bloggers".  Or I can just leave you out of it and anon-o-mize it.

Good luck.  Looking forward to more posts from you.

Jamie

Perhaps it’s not obvious, but just in case, let me add “reprinted with permission”.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

More on Cedric Benson’s arrest for Boating While Intoxicated here, but I was alternately amused and/or saddened by this line in the AP report about the recent Austin incident:

Benson had a couple of brushes with the law during his college days.

He was arrested for marijuana possession in May of 2002 in his hometown of Midland, Texas. The charges were dropped when he passed a drug test and other evidence surfaced to clear him.

Hmmmmmmm.

The charges were dropped. He passed drug test. And, according to the writer, ‘other evidence surfaced to clear him’. But we won’t say what that was.

But, and here’s the important thing to remember, as you read this story about Benson being arrested, let’s not forget that he has had other ‘brushes with the law’.

Clearly the reporter has included this information because it’s pertinent to the main story. If we apply the well known rule that ‘where there’s smoke there’s fire’… does that mean that:

• Because he’s been arrested before he’s more likely to be guilty this time or
• Because his prior arrest had to be dropped - at least in part because of evidence of innocence - that ‘there go the police, arresting an innocent man again’?

I’m just asking, that’s all.

• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks

Maybe if it had only been $360 million dollars they wouldn’t have noticed.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

"In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country."

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)

Make no mistake: I’m not asking for kudos on this subject. I’ve long since passed the age of ‘grown man’ and probably should have been more vocal about it in the past. And I’ve too often let it go. But I’ve taken recently to openly confronting friends and casual acquaintances when they express themselves in ways that are ‘anti-gay’.

Just for context, we’re not talking about ignoring open hostility towards homosexuals, or expressing disgust at morons who use slurs and ugly epithets hoping that the listener expresses tacit or silent approval. You don’t see - or should I say ‘hear’ – that often, at least in Austin.

Austin is the only Austin in Texas. We are weird, for Texas – and that includes being less anti-gay than the rest of Texas.

A quick example.

Went to lunch with a couple folks awhile back, criminal defense lawyers, and somehow the subject of Gay Marriage came up – don’t remember how. Two distinct attitudes popped up:

• Hate the sin, love the sinner (but I’m not a bigot)
• ‘Gay Marriage’ isn’t about rights for gays, it’s about ‘legitimizing’ the gay lifestyle

I purposely started inserting the phrase ‘anti-gay’ into my responses to describe their views. Quick sidetrack: the purpose of phrasing it that way was (a) deliberately confrontational and (b) meant to make them feel uncomfortable. It worked.

‘Hate the Sin’ started insisting that he was not anti-gay. In fact, as a good Christian, he had formerly lived with gays, had friends that were gay, blah blah blah. He then went on to give me an analogy that would help me understand how not anti-gay he was:

• I’m against theft… but I defend thieves
• I’m against crack… but I take POCS cases

Exactly! You aren’t pro-theft, but you think everyone deserves a defense. You also think imprisoning drug addicts at taxpayers’ expense is stupid, and you defend possession of controlled substance charges, but you wouldn’t recommend smoking crack to your friends or family. That makes you…

• Anti-Theft and
• Anti-Crack

Uh, so am I.

But Mr. “Hate the Sin” - if that’s your analogy for this conversation, then accept that you are anti-gay. Perhaps the description makes you uncomfortable, but you proved why it is dead on accurate. Some people are anti-theft and anti-crack. You are anti-theft, anti-crack and anti-gay. Your analogy makes no sense otherwise.

Actually got a little worked up writing that. I’ll have to post later on Mr. ‘Gay Rights is just a Cover for Legitimizing Homosexuality’.

• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks

From an anonymous commenter (Revised for spelling, punctuation and all caps; comment since deleted):

I called the police on my boyfriend and said he hit me with a gun which never happened. I was mad and I wanted him to go to jail that day.

But now I feel bad for lying and I want to tell the truth but I don’t know what will happen since I lied to the police.

Please help me and tell me what I should do.

If you were meeting with “Criminal defense lawyer Jamie”  I would probably be under an obligation to tell you that you are subjecting yourself to the possibility of being charged with False Report to a Peace Officer by stepping up to the plate and admitting your lie.

Prosecutors routinely threaten to file such charges against complainants (I refuse to call them victims) in assault cases when they “change their story”. In actuality it almost never happens.

In over ten years of practicing criminal defense, I’ve had the occasional false report client, but I’ve never seen one for this particular situation – that is, for taking back an accusation of assault. But as your lawyer, I might feel obliged to advise you to shut up. And at the very least, I’d warn you of the possible consequences, and have you balance that with your need to assuage your guilt.

But here’s the thing. I’m not your lawyer, and this isn’t legal advice, it’s “be a decent human being” advice:

Go to the police, the prosecutor, and your boyfriend’s lawyer – and tell each and every single one of them that you falsely accused him. If his lawyer is worth anything at all, he will have you sign an affidavit to that effect.

He is in a heck of a lot more trouble than you are, or probably ever will be, but more importantly, it’s the right thing to do.

But then, you already knew that, didn’t you?

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)

From Grit’s ‘Statesman Late to the Stop Snitching Party’:

In the Austin Statesman today, Joshunda Sanders has a story informing us, "'Stop Snitching' sentiment spreads to Austin," and I'll expand here on comments I left under her story on the newspaper's site.

First, three years ago after I began writing about this topic, a friend bought me a "Stop Snitching" t-shirt from a vendor here in Austin. I don't wear it much, but I've seen the shirts here and there ever about town ever since. So why do we now we get a story saying the sentiment is "spreading to Austin"?

The article quotes almost exclusively police sources, including one bizarre claim that's blatantly, patently false: "The word 'snitch' gives [police] pause”, writes Sanders, "'The only people who call it 'snitching' are crooks talking to crooks,' said former Homicide Commander Harold Piatt with the Austin Police Department, who is now retired."

Actually, the reporter unintentionally reveals how untrue the policeman’s claim is. From further on in the article itself, a witness tells her:

"People always say 'don't snitch' out here," she said, "But you should snitch because cooperating with police can help you keep your community safe."

Let’s apply the ‘crooks talking to crooks rule’.

The witness uses the word ‘snitch’.  So… she’s a crook. And she’s talking to the person writing the article. Also a crook.

For a prosecutor’s viewpoint on the article, see Steanso for more substantive – by which I really mean less smart alec - commentary.

Update: Another example of crooks/journalists using the word snitch. H/T: Dallas Criminal Defense

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

An attorney advertises (in one place) that his ‘specialties’ include ‘criminal motion practice’ and then posts this to a general someone-please-answer-my-question site:

What are some of the standard pre-trial motions attorneys file in criminal cases?

Most of my court-appointed cases usually end up with a plea deal at the preliminary hearing, or the DA and I work out a plea before indictment (PBI). However, I have two cases where my clients are refusing plea deals, and we are headed to trial. Both have been indicted.

I am aware of the standard "Brady" motion; but are there others which are useful?

Ouch.

I can’t decide whether to post a link to where I ran across this tidbit. I’ll take a poll in the comments section. Should I or shouldn’t I? 

• Print
• Comments (6)
• Trackbacks

A Harris County Lawyer continues her (his?) excellent series on the inner workings of the District Attorney’s Office in Houston with “The Capital Murder Decision” which takes us through the process used to determine whether or not to seek the death penalty:

Harris County has long been synonymous with being the "Death Penalty Capital of the World" and it has always been pretty much the center of every debate on capital punishment since the 1970s.

Good opening – I’m glad to not have to debate that point, but let’s throw in some facts and figures just to prove that the nickname is more than well deserved, it’s literally true. If Harris County were a State, it would rank second to Texas and ahead of current number two Virginia in number of inmates executed since 1982, when Texas reinstated the death penalty.

One portion of the decision making process?

If a Defendant has priors, the prosecutor won't just order the Judgment and Sentence reflecting the conviction. They will order the offense report, the old file, and everything else that they possibly can to understand what happened on the prior offense.

Reading offense reports of priors is certainly appropriate. But let’s not forget the number one rule of offense reports: The police put in all the bad facts, and leave out anything mitigating or exculpatory. So if you want the worst possible take on an offense? Read the police report – several times preferably.

They often pull the Defendant's school records if he is young. They will talk to the victim's family members and discuss their feelings about the case.

Victim’s family members are rarely going to oppose the death penalty in a murder case. I hope I would – but frankly, I’m not sure. Actually, I think I’d want to kill the S.O.B. myself, but I wouldn’t want the government to do it. And I’m against the death penalty.

They will look at the offense itself and decide how bad the facts of the case-in-chief are. Sadly, in this day and age, a capital murder during a convenience store robbery doesn't really "shock the conscience" like it used to.

Now we get to the thesis of AHCL’s post. Harris County only asks jurors to execute in cases where the murder shocks the conscience.

But that still doesn’t come close to answering the question of why Harris County’s death penalty rate is so high. And it’s high – I should say the highest and by a long shot - by any metric: total executions, percentage of murder convictions where a sentence of death is imposed, number of capital cases indicted, etc. It’s the percentages of death sentences to murders that begs the next question:

Why are the consciences of Harris County prosecutors/jurors so easily shocked – compared to every other geographical region in the country with statistically significantly lower death penalty rates?

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Blogging lawyers in Houston and Forth Worth are posting back and forth on which is the superior quality to be found in a criminal defense lawyer: empathy or ruthlessness.

Thought about jumping into the fray, but why rewrite my thoughts when I can cut and paste? Last year from one of my own posts “Are You An Aggressive Defense Lawyer?”:

One of the main buzzwords you see on even the best criminal defense lawyer websites is the phrase “aggressive defense”. I guess this either sounds good, or more likely, whoever wrote the website for the lawyer thinks it sounds good. Either way, I don’t call myself an aggressive lawyer.

On the contrary, I go to great lengths to be courteous and well mannered. In the initial negotiations stage of a case, the prosecutor has a great deal of leeway to potentially offer a better than average deal (which is what all of my clients are seeking). Why would they bend a little if the lawyer in a particular case was acting aggressively?

Potential clients who want their lawyer to act like the guest star on Law & Order don’t have a real firm grasp on their situation in the first place. If I truly have the upper hand when it comes to the law and the facts (and that does happen occasionally) there’s still no point in my coming into the prosecutor’s office and yelling and screaming at them. Or whatever it is that being aggressive or ruthless means.

I’m not perfect by any means. The courtroom can be a frustrating place, and lots of times I have to swallow my ego when some prosecutor is yelling at me about all the terrible things my client is accused of. I’ve been known – on occasion – to lose my temper.

But that usually leads me to the realization that I haven’t done my clients many favors.

For me the appropriate buzzword here is: competitive.

I don’t like to lose; whether it’s chess, poker, or my client’s case, I want to win. Sometimes (often?) a win is convincing a prosecutor to dismiss or reduce a case – perhaps in return for the client doing some community service, or an alcohol or drug awareness class – that the State could take to trial and likely get a Guilty verdict.

Sometimes a win is having that pretrial motion to suppress even though the prosecutor insists there are no legitimate issues. (A) You might actually win it and (B) it may bring out other problems with the State’s case; for example that the police officer makes a terrible witness.

Sometimes it means taking the case to trial.

There’s probably a reasonable argument that doing those things listed makes you aggressive/ruthless/substitute-your-favorite-adjective here. Perhaps it’s just a matter of semantics.

But I’ve seen plenty of lawyers come in to talk to a prosecutor about a case, and behave like first class jerks. It’s actually the exception not the rule. (The rule is that civil lawyers are not at all civil, while criminal lawyers usually are.)

And whenever I see someone touting themselves as “aggressive” that’s the image that comes to mind.

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks (1)

Ken Lammers at CrimLaw will be happy to know that the list of prosecutor blogs just keeps growing and growing.

I should have thrown A Harris County Lawyer into the mix a long time ago. And I’ve recently run across “da blog” written by an anonymous “assistant district attorney in a large, metropolitan city”. My guess? That city is likely Houston, and definitely in Texas.

Any other blogging prosecutors please email me or comment sometime so I’ll be sure to know about you.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks