Surveillance Camera News

S.C.N. Vol I. No.VI

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Assorted News Items , Links and Press Peleases for: August 2000 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ________________________________________________________ Town puts cameras in park restrooms August 25, 2000 BY ART GOLAB STAFF REPORTER Tourists who go to the historic Lake Michigan harbor town of Ludington, Mich., often take pictures of its beautiful scenery and its 19th century lighthouses. They probably don't expect to wind up on camera themselves--especially not when they're using public bathrooms. But the town, a popular summer getaway for Chicagoans, has had what passes in Ludington for a rash of vandalism: seven instances so far this year of damage ranging from broken toilets to feces spread across the floor. So, to scare the vandals away, it has put video cameras in some park restrooms, some of them real, some of them dummies. Signs inside the bathrooms read: "Rest rooms may be under surveillance." City Manager Jim Miller said the cameras are a necessary last resort to battle vandals. "We're not going to take all this vandalism. We've put them on notice." The American Civil Liberties Union doesn't buy it. "The process of moving from public park into a bathroom usually comes with the expectation that there will be some privacy, and that is lost when you turn on video cameras," said Kary Moss, executive director of the Michigan affiliate of the ACLU. Moss argues that the cameras violate Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure. "Just because there is a crime doesn't mean everyone can be searched," Moss said. "There has to be probable cause." Miller said steps are being taken to assure people's privacy. No cameras will be aimed into stalls or at urinals. "We will not be watching people going to the bathroom," Miller said. Also, he said, no tapes are saved, and no one will watch them unless bathrooms are vandalized. Contributing: Associated Press [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] Schools Grow Electronic Eyes by Chris Oakes 3:00 a.m. Aug. 21, 2000 PDT Ronald Blandie likes his video cameras. Twenty-five of the closed-circuit devices keep watch over the hallways, stairwells, and bathroom entrances of Blandie's New Jersey high school. Two full-time security personnel review videotape from the cameras daily, and if offenses are caught on screen, the students involved are called in and presented with the visual evidence. "You're looking for behavior, you're looking for graffiti, you're looking for drug situations and that kind of stuff," said Blandie, superintendent of the 7,000-student Piscataway school district. "We've caught kids on camera, and we've disciplined kids from the camera. Kids know it's there." That knowledge alone, Blandie insisted, goes a long way in reducing discipline problems at Piscataway High School, the lone high school in the district. When it comes to a newfound reliance on electronic surveillance, Blandie and his district aren't alone. In the post-Columbine era of school safety, closed-circuit video, metal detectors, and door monitors are becoming routine. Congress and the U.S. Department of Energy, state task forces, and district superintendents are among the ardent supporters of surveillance systems for safer schools. In large urban schools where violence can be routine, administrators see surveillance systems as a way to bring a semblance of control to chronically violent hallways. Where violence is not a major problem, principals and superintendents call the installations preventive, eager to show a tangible reaction to Columbine and other school shootings. Twelve students were killed by two fellow students in April, 1999 at Columbine High in Littleton, Colorado. Though Center for Disease Control statistics indicate that school-related violent deaths have decreased steadily since 1992, an increase in Columbine-like multiple-victim homicides have helped spur an interest in technological solutions. William Pfeffer, principal of Theodore Roosevelt Jr. High in Altoona, Pennsylvania, said his district is among those that wanted to react to the alarming rash of shootings, even if the effectiveness of surveillance wasn't yet clear. The junior high school of 1,100 students turned on a new 12-camera video system during the last few months of the 1999-2000 school year. Students are subjected to random searches, either with a portable walk-through metal detector or locker-sniffing dogs. Pfeffer can call up any camera he desires on a TV monitor in his office, reviewing footage as needed. Lacking a major history of problems in the school, Pfeffer calls the security ramp-up proactive. "Word gets out (about the cameras and searches) and I think it's had an effect that way," Pfeffer said. "Certainly I think no matter what you do, somebody could do something probably. It's just, like I said, a proactive measure." The cameras at Piscataway High School have caught fighting and graffiti, an estimated 20 infractions in all during their two-year stint. Like other schools, Piscataway also moves a camera between buses, and the district is considering expanding the installation into its middle school. Is it all an invasion of student privacy? Big brother on the playground? Or, as suggested by a student article in the paper of a video-equipped high school in Pennsylvania, a heavy-handed blow against PDA -- a.k.a. "public displays of affection"? Nah, Blandie said. "The only thing (students) were concerned about was that we weren't going to put them in the bathroom -- which you can't, legally." That's real invasion of privacy, he said. Other than that, he said, it's a non-issue for students. "As long as you're not fornicating in the hallways, we're not going to make a big deal," Blandie said. Not wanting to miss out on potential revenue streams, security technology firms are eager to promote the advantages of surveillance tech to the emerging marketplace. Sensormatics, a leading manufacturer of surveillance cameras that built its $1 billion international business on anti-shoplifting technology, has found new customers in the education market. School districts in Illinois, Texas, and California are among those that use the company's high-tech cameras to monitor parking lots, football fields, and hallways. By the fall of 2003, Sensormatics estimates that 62 percent of middle and high schools will implement some form of electronic security. "There are signs that schools are and will be turning to these devices more," said William Behre, an assistant professor at the College of New Jersey's Department of Special Education. Behre is one of three researchers in a University of Michigan study who studied violence in Midwestern schools, and the administrators' responses. The five schools in the 1999 study ranged in size from 155 to 2,000 students and ran the racial and economic gamut. All had expensive security systems in place, including cameras, metal detectors, and police guards. But the verdict is still out on the effectiveness of this relatively young in-school technology. And critics wonder whether an emphasis on technology means educators and policy-makers are ignoring the root causes of violence in schools. The University of Michigan study gave generally low marks to surveillance measures. Praise for the system came mainly from administrators, while most students and teachers described the measures as ineffective. "Will it let an administrator know who did what? Sure," Behre said. "Will it stop violence in any significant way? I don't think so." After all, he noted, Columbine itself used surveillance cameras. And in that infamous case, the cameras only played a role after the fact. Behre said he's also watched video taken by school bus cameras, where major fights occurred despite the monitoring. "Violence occurs as an emotional outburst," he said. "If people were thinking clearly enough to avoid a camera they would likely realize that fighting isn't the best choice." Education expert Mary Ann Raywid, professor emeritus from Hofstra College, said cameras not only were ineffective, but further students' sense of themselves as misfits. "(Administrators) are learning the wrong lesson from Columbine," Raywid said. "What people should have picked up from this is how hurt and maimed kids can get. They are ill-treated by their peers. So long as long as you keep large high schools where kids can travel and never be seen, that's what happens to a lot of them." Dr. Nina Buchanan, chair of the education department at the University of Hawaii at Hilo, sees a single philosophy as a universal solution: Small is better. The state of Hawaii is among those considering placing metal detectors, surveillance cameras, and guards in island schools. "The bigger picture of what's going on in schools is sort of ignored," Buchanan said. "People want to do a quick fix. They want to just put a little money here, or do something over there -- and it doesn't work, no matter what it is we're talking about -- raising achievement or making schools safe." Raywid said the presence of cameras only worsens students' perception of themselves and their surroundings. "As soon as you stick in a security guard, you're saying something to kids about what you think of them," Raywid said. While she was working in a New York City school, Raywid said she saw students intentionally play games where the goal was to hide things from security cameras, and shield knives and guns from metal detectors. The games even made kids who wouldn't be interested in bringing guns or knives to school compete just to see if they could "beat the machine," she said. Behre said he has had students teach him personally how to get weapons past metal detectors. "I think administrators are feeling a lot of pressure, and this is the way in which they're responding," Raywid said. But Piscataway school district superintendent Blandie said surveillance is only the latest expansion of such technology long used around any department store, 7-11, or ATM. Blandie said it's a simple and effective part of the effort to create a safer place to teach kids. "It's all over," he said. "I don't mind being on camera, if I have nothing to hide. No big deal. If you don't do anything wrong, then you don't have to worry about that camera looking at you." For its part, security firm Sensormatics doesn't claim to offer Columbine-stoppers. But by degrees, they say, the technology can reduce the chances of major security breaches. "I don't think there's anything that would have stopped (the Columbine shooting) other than maybe metal detectors," said Louis Chiera, marketing manager of Sensormatics. But "what it could have done is that just as some people saw them doing something out in the parking lot area, it may have given people on the inside a little bit more time to react." But Behre and his colleagues concluded that reliance on technology distracts schools from the underlying causes of violence. "Technologies seek to detect and remove individuals' ability to carry out violence," Behre said. We need to stress programs that reduce individuals' desire to be violent. A determined person will beat virtually any technology, but only if he wants to." [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] British bishop slams "human zoo" Big Brother show LONDON, Aug 19 (Reuters) - A senior British Anglican bishop condemned reality game show Big Brother on Saturday, calling it a human zoo that could ruin the lives of its contestants. Speaking amid a media backlash against participant "Nasty Nick" Bateman, dubbed "Britain's most hated man" and expelled from the show for breaking the rules, the Bishop of Liverpool James Jones said the programme raised real concerns. Bateman was among 10 contestants in a specially constructed house filled with cameras. Each week, participants nominate two of their number for eviction and viewers choose who must go. The last person left wins 70,000 pounds ($104,000). Bateman was caught trying to influence the nominations. "What they are doing in the end is colluding with the creation of a human zoo where the human beings are trapped in a confined space under continual observation and occasionally fed treats by Big Brother," Jones told BBC radio. "Who knows what the long-term consequences are going to be? I wonder how Nick will actually cope with the hostile public reaction and the hostile press he is encountering," he added. "It is a pretty high price to pay for entertainment." Nick was kicked out after his housemates discovered he had broken the show's rules by writing down names on pieces of paper and trying to influence contestants' votes. The former stockbroker -- dubbed a "Machiavellian lying rat" by the British media -- left the fly on the wall show on Thursday after more than a month. Channel Four estimates some six million viewers watched his fall from grace on television and the Internet. Amid concerns for his safety, the popular programme's makers Channel Four have made psychological counsellors available to the 32-year-old. However while a spokeswoman for the show said it was likely Nick would "remain out of reach for a while", the tabloid Sun newspaper reported on Saturday it had signed him up in a lucrative deal to tell his "Big Brother life story". The British version of Big Brother followed successful series in the Netherlands and Germany. Dutch Production firm Endemol developed the format. ($1=.6683 Pound) [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] Love to spy on someone? THE GIZMO: Spy-tronics from Bolide International Co., 9660 Flair Drive, Suite 218, El Monte, Calif. 91731. Phone: 800-355-0895. On the Web at www.bolideamazing products.com WHY WE CARE: Worried about the baby sitter's conduct when you're not around? Fearful that someone's been rifling your desk? Nervous about carrying valuable items? Think Big Brother's watching you? Wondering why people are always asking so many questions? Calm down and check out some of the electronic spy wares from Bolide International. It's the manufacturer/retailer that James Bond and Austin Powers would visit if they were alive and well and living in L.A. (or surfing the Web) instead of chasing down creeps like Goldfinger and Dr. Evil. Sure, some of the Bolide merchandise gives us the creeps, from a privacy perspective. But we figure it's good protection to know that your enemy exists and does have his eyes on you. SMILE, YOU'RE ON CANDID CAMERA: Ever wonder how those undercover TV shows get such great pictures of creepizoids doing their evil stuff? Or how in blazes the boss knew you were slacking off on company time? The snoops had micro-miniature video cameras, disguised inside seemingly innocent, everyday objects. In fact, Bolide sells enough different varieties to decorate your entire house or office. There are cameras plus 2.4 GHz signal transmitters hiding inside a hanging flower basket, a phony VHS tape, a wall clock, tissue box, smoke alarm, exit sign, functional desktop lamp and clock radio, just to name a few. Prices run around $199 for versions with black-and-white cameras, up to $299 for color video camera versions that'll catch the bright red blushing in your cheeks when the cops burst in on your illegal gambling operation. A transmitter packed into each of these devices has an operating range of up to 700 feet - so the installing spy doesn't even have to remain in the same building with the snooped-upon subjects. A signal receiver, also included in each package, then nabs and displays the purloined images on a TV or records them on a VCR. IS THAT A PEN IN YOUR POCKET OR. . .? Maybe Simon and Garfunkel were feeling overly paranoid when they sang about a guy on the bus whose "bowtie is really a camera." But they weren't far off the mark of covert cameras you really can acquire for traveling accessories. Bolide sells versions sewn inside a necktie, a baseball cap and a denim jacket, plus wired-up backpacks and gym bags, each going for $199 to $299. Picture quality from these covert, bug-sized cameras is surprisingly sharp and bright, with resolution specs as good as you see on broadcast TV. And the black-and-white versions capture images in virtually no light at all - just 0.01 lux. Even more Austin Powers-like are the pen camera ($799) and the color sunglasses camera ($899/$999 color), which hides a micro-image grabber behind the nose piece. So what you see is what you'll record (on an optional VCR). Oh, behave! BABY SITTERS, BEWARE: How are you going to keep tabs on the house - or the baby sitter - when you're miles away? One answer is Bolide's motion-detector VCR with built-in hidden camera ($500). To preserve tape, and capture just the funny business, it only records when it senses movement in the room, then stops one minute after quiet returns. Bolide's most popular security VCR ($600) can record an amazing 24 hours in real time or 40 days (and nights) of time-lapse recording on a regular VHS tape. Great for watching grass grow! While there are 12 different picture-recording speeds on this deck, audio playback is available in only the 2-, 12- and 24-hour modes. For the ultimate in remote control, Bolide offers a distant-viewing monitoring system ($1,999) that operates over a normal phone line to call up live views of up to four different camera locations. Hey, there's that pesky neighbor kid in your pool again! DIRTY TRICKS PEOPLE PLAY: While we can certainly see some good in many of the devices this house of spies sells, a few seem just plain sick. Worst may be the telephone-line devices dubbed Dead Ringer and Wrong Number Generator (each $160). With the former installed on a line, a caller hears the phone ring and ring, but the poor sap whose phone is bugged never hears a thing. That's because the device blocks the "trigger voltage" that causes a phone to ring. Even more sordid is the Wrong Number Generator, which causes outgoing calls made from the targeted phone to reach wrong numbers. "Think about how absolutely maddening and frustrating that would be if it were to happen to your phone, and you'll begin to appreciate the devastating effect that this device can have," cheers Bolide's product literature. Even more perverse, calls to 911 do go through OK, as do about 25 percent of regular calls. Bet that poor sap will be up all night, yelling at folks at the phone company. Welcome to the Twilight Zone. A COURIER'S BEST FRIEND: Ever have your portable computer snatched at the airport? Nervous over lugging around a case full of precious gems and gold bullion? Stuff the goods into Bolide's very Bond-like carrying cases - armed and dangerous and available in either a rich leather attache or aluminum alloy version ($600-$700) - and your worries may be over. In their standby mode, you can actually walk away, leave one of these cases sitting in the middle of Times Square for a bad guy to come along and snatch. (Yeah, go ahead - make my day.) When lifted 30 degrees out of its horizontal position, the case will automatically issue a warning siren. Then, five seconds later, it shocks the would-be thief with an electrifying 50,000-volt jolt. Oooh, that smarts. Even if the case hasn't been armed, and someone pulls it out of your grip, you can get revenge and the goods back by tapping on a special remote control. First let the dude run away from you up to 500 feet (more than the length of a football field) to avoid confrontation and the nasty smell of burning flesh. Then press the remote-control key to shock that scalawag from here to San Bernadino. HOW DO YOU LIKE YOUR MARTINIS? Shaken, not stirred, but of course. So let us raise our glass to the enduring spirit of author Ian Fleming's primo gizmo/dirty tricks maker Q. While he may be gone, his work ethic carries on at Bolide International - for real. Send e-mail to takiffj@phillynews.com 2000 Philadelphia Newspapers Inc. [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] Friday August 18 1:49 PM ET British 'Big Brother' Star Booted By JILL LAWLESS, Associated Press Writer LONDON (AP) - He is the most reviled TV villain since J.R. Ewing. Newspapers have labeled him ``the most hated man in Britain.'' Nick Bateman didn't bring down a corporation or savage the environment. He broke the rules of a television game show - and for that, Big Brother decreed, he must be banished. ``Nasty Nick,'' a 32-year-old insurance broker, was evicted from the British version of the ``Big Brother'' reality TV show on Thursday for conspiring against fellow contestants - and walked into a new life of national opprobrium, front-page attention and lucrative media deals. The ouster was headline news in Friday morning's newspapers. ``Nick's Out'' blared the tabloid Sun. ``TV nemesis as the enemy within is turfed out'' said the usually serious Times. ``I haven't committed a murder,'' Bateman told a packed news conference Friday. ``I was just taking part in a game show.'' In ``Big Brother,'' 10 strangers must share a house under the constant surveillance of cameras and microphones. Each week contestants are nominated for eviction by the household, and viewers decide which will be ousted. Although the original Dutch version was harshly criticized as exploitative and voyeuristic, the show became a hit and was copied in Germany, Spain and now the United States and England. In the British version, the last person remaining after nine weeks wins $105,000. The show's combination of voyeurism and melodrama has made it a hit with British viewers, 5.5 million of whom tuned in Thursday. Even the soberest of newspapers have tracked the daily spats and squabbles - and the sole kiss to date - among the housemates. The undisputed star of the show was Bateman, who deftly manipulated his fellow contestants, a self-absorbed but mostly amiable lot, in a bid to influence their votes. Early in the program, he told his housemates that he had been married and his wife had been killed in a car accident in Australia. He later confessed he had made up the story. The populist Sun newspaper launched a ``Kick Out Nick'' campaign and attempted to drop leaflets on the house to reveal to the other contestants that Nick was lying. Newspapers mulled over conspiracy theories - that he had been planted in the house by producers to stir things up, or had smuggled in a mobile phone in his underwear to receive instructions from outside. On Thursday, Bateman's housemates discovered what viewers had known for weeks: He had lied, set them against one another and, in violation of the game's rules, smuggled in pen and paper with which to plot his strategy. Producers, who had already issued Bateman a written warning for discussing the eviction nominations, disqualified him. He was promptly whisked off to an undisclosed location to meet with his family and a counselor - and then the press. On Friday, he told reporters: ``I'm just an ordinary guy who took part in a very unusual experiment.'' The show's high profile is likely to translate into cash for contestants. Sada Walkington, the first British ``Big Brother'' evictee, has already sold her story to a tabloid newspaper for a substantial sum, been selected to front an ad campaign for Internet search engine Yahoo and received corporate gifts including a sport utility vehicle. Nick could do far better. ``He can make a lot of money very quickly,'' said tabloid-savvy public relations professional Max Clifford told Sky News. ``If he is as devious and ruthless as he comes across there's a career for him in PR, or politics obviously.'' [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] State Department Gets In Your Face By Doug Brown, Inter@ctive Week August 14, 2000 6:56 AM ET The federal government is considering the use of facial recognition technology to track the ebb and flow of travelers crossing U.S. borders. The Department of State recently issued a formal request for information about the technology in conjunction with the issuing of passports and visas, and possible use in select State Department buildings, such as embassies. A document released by the department detailing the project argued facial biometrics are necessary because "recent world events have highlighted the need for Department of State to further enhance its various systems' capabilities to effect positive identification of the numerous visitors and applicants at posts worldwide." The document cited "increasing threats to U.S. citizens and property." Privacy advocates were quick to express alarm. "You are building the capacity to record the faces of every American citizen who walks into a [State Department] building or who gets a passport," said Andrew Shen, a policy analyst at the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "Any time you build in such a technical ability to track people unawares, you are also creating the possibility for abuse in the future. I'm not confident any such database is going to stay confined to a narrow purpose." Shen called the database "this big jackpot for a hacker who wants to do some mischief." Hackers, he said, would undoubtedly try to break into the database and get their kicks by, for example, switching the facial algorithms of known criminals with those of innocent people. At the Center for Democracy and Technology, Senior General Counsel Jim Dempsey asked: "Will there be notice of the use of the technology? How will one be able to dispute the reliability of a match?" Dempsey called facial recognition technology "the wave of the future in terms of government surveillance." He said the document probably marks the first potential public use of the technology by the federal government. Facial recognition parses images into unique algorithms based on facial features and stores them on databases. The algorithms can be used, for example, like passwords, to give people access to networks instead of passwords. They can also be used for surveillance: Databases of the algorithms of known criminals could be tethered to cameras hunting for faces in public places. When a camera finds a match, law enforcement would be notified. State Department officials did not respond to requests for interviews about the project. The document, however, said the technology would be used to store passport and visa image data. It further said that its use would involve the installation of cameras in State Department buildings to capture images of passersby and compare the images with "a repository of facial images of persons of interest to the Department of State." Erik Bowman, a former biometric analyst, is now manager of emerging markets at Anadac, a company in the fingerprinting portion of the biometric universe. Bowman said facial recognition technologies are in their infancy, but the industry is growing quickly. The marketing of biometrics is tricky, he said, because of fears of Big Brother. Frances Zelazny, director of corporate communications at Visionics, the industry leader in facial recognition technology, said the company "knows about" the public's fears. She said the technology, "if implemented properly, protects privacy rather than takes away from privacy," by making identity theft more difficult. Visionics has already responded to the State Department request for information, and intends to bid on the project if the department decides to build a system, Zelazny said. Yona Wieder is vice president of business development at Lau Technologies, another leader in the field. Wieder predicted that the State Department project - for which the company plans to submit information and ultimately bid, if it gets to that stage - "will start small and expand." Talkback: Post your comment here In response to Jim Dempsey from... - David S. Teitelman [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] TEEN MURDER CAUGHT ON HOUSING-PROJECT CAMERA By ROCCO PARASCANDOLA and ADAM MILLER NY Post August 13th, 2000 A surveillance camera at a city housing project captured the cold-blooded murder of a Queens teenager on videotape, authorities said yesterday. Wilton Chandler, 18, was shot once in the chest and once in the arm while hanging out with friends on a park bench at the South Jamaica Houses, police said. Chandler - who relatives said was recently released from prison - was rushed to Mary Immaculate Hospital, where doctors were unable to save his life. "He was sitting on a bench with his friends, and this man came up to him and said, 'What's up?' " a witness said. "The man lifted up his shirt, pulled out a gun from his pants and started shooting. It was crazy." The witness said the shooter jumped into a car and sped away. Police recovered several 9mm shells at the scene. The motive for the shooting was unknown. Chandler's cousin, Coleel Gales, 32, said the victim had recently served eight months in prison and was planning to get his high-school equivalency degree and move to Chicago. "He was trying to get his life back," she said. "It's really sad he was killed for no reason." The 3:05 a.m. shooting was the first murder caught on tape at a city housing project - although the cameras have been used to solve other crimes. Last summer, cops arrested a man for shooting a Manhattan woman through the heart after she tried to stop him from stealing her bag. A camera at the Grant Houses showed the gunman pedaling away on a bike and led cops to their suspect. Police said most of the dispute between Chandler and his assailant was recorded. It was unclear whether the shooter could be identified from the video images. [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|] [|]