Aggressively litigating intricately complex federal RICO §1962(d) conspiracy relief claims and RICO §1962(d) criminal counts present intensely technical issues. These exceedingly significant complex issues include application of the Pinkerton Doctrine and the concept of mediate causation when intimately analyzed and critically evaluated in the context of judicially differentiating inexplicably inconsistent and diametrically inapposite interpretations of the Pinkerton Doctrine, mediate causation, and mediate causality, involving prosecuting and litigating racketeering conspiracies of racial and ethnic minorities and contrasted with prosecuting and litigating white collar professionals and corporate financial institutions. The express purpose of this Abstract section of this multi-volume treatise is expressly intended to critically contrast judicially incongruent, inexplicably inconsistent interpretations and varying applications of these doctrinal postulates by critically analyzing federal decisional authorities rendering conflicting results. These results are graphically exemplified in the context of judicially differentiating and readily distinguishing litigation in the criminal RICO §1962(d) conspiratorial context of racial minorities and ethnic minorities indicted with commission of federal statutory offenses aggressively prosecuted resulting in conviction, contrasted with civil RICO §1962(d) conspiratorial litigation involving white collar professionals and corporate financial institutions accused of commission of federal statutory offenses arising in monetary and financial transactions involving property loss. This treatise concludes that Pinkerton and mediate causation be accorded judicially symmetrical application without judicial differentiation between RICO §1962(d) criminal prosecutions and RICO §1962(d) civil litigation.

This title is designed for law of the sea and maritime law specialists. The coverage includes current affairs in martime law such as submarine cables, polar areas, environmental protection, sovereign immunity and sunken ships, and maritime law enforcement.

Employing a hands-on, structured approach, the author leads the reader through carefully crafted exercises that allow readers to understand and make practical use of AngloAmerican legal terminology. The layered sequence of topics and exercises leads from the simplest use of legal terminology in conversation to mastery of advanced legal terminology and increasingly complex writing.

The concept of prosecuting war criminals is not unique to the modern world. Individuals who breached the "rules of war" were tried in Ancient Greece, and probably earlier. However, those early prosecutions were carried out by national courts, generally by victors against the vanquished, and so could hardly be described as examples of fair and impartial international justice. Underpinning the prosecutions was a notion that, even in war, there are certain rules which must be obeyed. The first notable international attempt to codify these "rules of war" was the Geneva Convention of 1864, followed by the Hague conventions in 1899 and 1907.