To access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week. Would you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletters
Norwegian oil and gas company, Aker BP, started oil production from the Ivar Aasen field in the North Sea on Saturday.Aker BP is the operator of the unitized development, with a 34.7862 percent interest.The Ivar Aasen field is located in the northern part of the North Sea, about 175 km west of Karmøy, and contains around 186 million barrels of oil equivalent (boe), excluding Hanz.The development of the Ivar Aasen includes deposits for five licenses, 001B, PL028 B, PL242, PL338 and PL457. The unitization of the licenses covers deposits in Ivar Aasen and West Cable. Hanz deposit in license PL028 B is not covered by the unitization.The anticipated economic life of Ivar Aasen is 20 years, depending on oil price and production trend.Oil and gas from Ivar Aasen is processed and exported from Grieg platform, which also supplies power to Ivar Aasen.
The approved sales agreement is for 185.5 acres (75 ha) for approximately USD66 million dollars, subject to appraisal modifications. To seal the agreement, Canyon agreed on a USD20 million dollar down payment with a nonrefundable USD1 million payment on the day the deal was signed. The balance of USD19 million will be due on December 20, 2011. The remaining balance will be paid in a promissory note of USD46 million over the next ten years and includes a balloon payment of USD20 million at the end.”Port Commission and staff are looking forward to working with Canyon Supply and Logistics to complete the sale of the former US Naval Station Ingleside. Canyon is a great industry fit to redevelop the facility. They will be able to create many new jobs for the area affected by the departure of the Navy,” said Mike Carrell, chairman of the Port Commission. Canyon Supply and Logistics is a special service-purpose company that will develop the industrial part of the facility for offshore logistics to support the oil and gas industry in the western Gulf of Mexico.US Naval Station Ingleside was designated for closure under the Base Realignment and Closure Act of 2005, which resulted in the departure of the Navy by April 30, 2010. On that date, ownership of the base reverted to the Port of Corpus Christi Authority. The US Naval Station Ingleside property encompasses 483 acres (195.4 ha) with more than 70 buildings, including warehouse facilities, administrative offices, barracks, fitness and recreation facilities, a capital-class pier and wharf area, and much more.
Craig Barlow , is barrister of Ely Place Chambers, London, and Jason M Hadden MBE , is barrister of St Ives Chambers, Birmingham Television has for a number of years been a reason why people ultimately decide to become lawyers. From fictional characters, programmes such as Rumpole, Judge Deed, LA Law and Silks, we are offered a creative window into the world of the legal profession. But what about real lawyers? The live web streaming of the UK Supreme Court sittings is not just revolutionary; it’s little short of a revelation. According to the Supreme Court, some 20,000 viewers daily watch such streaming. There is a good reason for lawyers to watch the live argument. By viewing one can experience the cut and thrust of the advocacy and from the justices’ incisive questioning, glean insight into the process of the court’s deepest thinking. As followers of the Supreme Court’s website streaming (we really should get out more), we are confident that this is an under-utilised advocacy tool for advocates of all levels. It is an under-resourced practical learning aid for shaping and honing the skills of appellate advocacy. At present viewers can only watch these sittings live. No recording is yet available to the public. We consider this to be a matter of regret and hopefully the court can be persuaded to make recordings of the same accessible. In the US Supreme Court, the sittings are not televised but on its website they publish not only audio but written transcripts of the oral argument hearings before the court. It’s true that hearings before the US Supreme Court are somewhat different in character to those heard by the UK court. Principally in the US there is a very short time limit for oral argument, with a heavy reliance upon written argument or ‘briefs’. Unlike the US version, the UK Supreme Court does not publish on its website the grounds of appeal or the parties’ rival ‘written skeleton arguments’. It does however provide (1) brief details of the issues raised; and (2) cite the lower court’s decision so as to generally enable the interested viewer to access the same on the internet. The live web coverage of the UK Supreme Court sittings are remarkably deft because of their skilful rotation between images of the bench and their questioning and their coverage of the advocates’ presentation and response. Indeed the visual coverage takes in the wider lens of juniors passing notes to leaders and the looks on solicitors’ and clients’ faces alike. For the viewer, the anxiety felt during the hearing is palpable. The truism that human communication relies not merely upon words, but also body language is made real. It is not just the words, but also the sound of the words. This leads to real insight into the innermost workings of the justices’ thought processes. Some are more proactive in questioning, others ask few questions. However, they tend to ask very penetrating questions. From time to time there’s judicial humour, occasionally there’s a question that hangs in the room unanswered like mustard gas. Rarely, and effectively there’s an unmistakable sniper’s shot that finishes one side’s case. The justices have different styles in the way they ask questions. A kind few are discursive and clue up the consequence of their question in an open-handed way. Others ask short serial questions that lay concealed intellectual traps, like landmines for the unwary advocate. Watching them in action, one gains the sense that there are occasionally both ideological and personality clashes between them. In short, they come across as real people, striving to do a difficult job. They’re learned jurists, not locked in ivory towers as their critics would have the populace believe, but as realists trying to find a workable legal solution to the most testing of legal conundrums. Some lack patience and exhibit minor blazes of anger and frustration with the advocates before them. Others are the epitome of judicial patience in the face of provocation. But individually, they do tend to disclose their predisposition to one proposition over another during argument. A classic example is Methodist Church v Preston . A case won below by the respondent in the EAT and the Court of Appeal. Having read the lower judgments (before we started to watch the case argued) we were initially against the appellant. But by skilful oral argument and didactic explanation to the court of previous authorities by the counsel at play, we could see the appellant’s counsel slowly win over the court. At the conclusion, we took the view that her arguments had prevailed. Months later, it transpired that she had succeeded by a 4-1 majority. Too often it has been the case that some of the most talented lawyers are dreadful advocates: whilst their analysis is sound, their voices grate like nails down a chalkboard. There are also those whose arguments are lost in the drone. So it is with watching the proceedings before the court. Some are the personification of charm and seductive with everything seamlessly at their fingertips. Others seem to bumble and struggle in articulating their arguments and responses. From time to time, there can be flashes of brilliance and mercurial answers to problematic questions. To select another example is the case of Petrodel Resources v Prest . By a majority the CA had overturned almost 40 years of practice in the Family Division. It gave rise to serious legal consequences, engaging issues of the correct statutory construction of the court’s powers under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, ascertaining beneficial interests in trust law and piercing the corporate veil in company law in the context of ancillary relief in family law. Obviously a clear ideological schism could be predicted in advance between the former family court judges (Lady Hale and Lord Wilson) and the former chancery judges (Lords Neuberger, Walker). It could be expected that the former commercial court judges, (Lords Mance and Clarke) would join in with the chancery view accompanied by Lord Sumption so as to produce a 5-2 split, dismissing the appeal. But during the live hearing – save for Hale and Wilson – it was not at all clear that the rest of the Supreme Court would so predictably divide. Lords Clarke and Walker voiced reservations about the lower court’s analysis of ‘beneficial interest’ in the ultimate corporate structures and Lord Neuberger appeared interested in balancing the competing public policy issues that arose. So whilst the Court of Appeal’s statutory interpretation of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 is likely to be upheld by a 5-2 split and piercing the corporate veil similarly, its determination of beneficial interests might be reversed by a narrow 4-3 split. At the time of writing this decision remains reserved and is not as yet due to be handed down. What this demonstrates is that there is an intricate balance of legal experience and approach in the Supreme Court and that the court’s collective mind is reassuringly not closed. It is amenable to persuasion during the argument. The web streaming thus of the Supreme Court, and indeed, in time perhaps other courts, should provide an awakening of faith in both the judiciary and the law. Whilst for many it may not offer the tantalising drama of a Downton or a Dr Who; it does open up a world of real-life suspense and indeed theatre. It gives a reassurance that the court, at least, is in safe hands.
ARGENTINA: The Ministry of Transport announced on February 21 that its track renewals programme on the 1 000 mm gauge Belgrano network had completed 400 km of the 535 km to be upgraded under the first phase.Involving the replacement of wooden sleepers with concrete, new rail and reballasting with stone ballast, work has now been completed on 122 km of route C12 in the province of Santiago del Estero, 78 km in Chaco province and 203 km on route C6 in Santa Fe.With aim of cutting both the transit time and cost of moving export consignments to the port of Rosario, ‘we are leading the most important upgrade ever undertaken of our rail freight network’, said Transport Minister Guillermo Dietrich. Completion of the first 400 km ‘fills us with enormous pride’, added Guillermo Fiad, President of infrastructure authority Trenes Argentinos Infraestructura.Work sites are now being prepared in Salta province for the start of Phase 2 of the programme, with contracts for Phase 3 to be awarded shortly. The Belgrano upgrade also includes renovating 33 bridges in areas susceptible to flooding at a cost of 600m pesos. Two have been completed in Santa Fe province, with work underway on 24 and the remainder out to tender.
The Operation Youth Quake, last week, received a significant amount of furniture, appliances and equipment to go toward the daily operations at the institution.The OECS Secretariat and US AID collaborated to develop the Juvenile Justice Reform Project which caters to juveniles within the OECS. That program was launched in Dominica in 2012.“All of this support is aimed at ensuring that the residents taken in by the OYQ will be well cared for,” permanent secretary in the Ministry of Social Service Esther Thomas said.Social Services Minister Gloria Shillingford also expressed gratitude to the OECS and US AID for the donation and applauded the Operation Youth Quake for their work with Dominica’s youth.“On behalf of the Government and the people of Dominica, I would like to express heartfelt thanks to the OECS and the US AID who have partnered to make the handing over of this furniture and equipment a reality,” she said.She also urged the residents to make the best use of the gift they received as it will improve the quality of life there and assist in the implementation of new skills.“As a Dominican, I’m happy that the OECS and US AID were able to provide the funding for the furniture and the equipment for the Operation Youth Quake,” OECS Commissioner Felix Gregoire said.Mr Gregoire also thanked and congratulated the Operation Youth Quake for its tremendous work for the past 34 years.“I must say there have been results despite the challenges. I am very happy with the ambiance at the Operation Youth Quake, it is an indication of the pride that you have in your work,” he said.Chances Home of Safety also benefitted from this initiative with two laptops and the Social Centre is also scheduled to receive supplies. A training program for staff at OYQ also forms part of the project.Lennox Abraham, who manages the institution, said it has been dedicated to assisting Dominica’s young people since its inception.The project is supported by the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative and came into effect on October 2011. It is expected to last until September 2014.Dominica Vibes News LocalNews OECS secretariat and US AID support Dominican youth by: – April 16, 2013 Share Share 10 Views no discussions Share Tweet Sharing is caring!
Share DEAD CHILD: A police officer holds up the body of one-year-old Jacob Monroe, who was found dead in an outhouse in Maracas Valley yesterday.A ONE-year-old boy was found dead in the latrine of a Maracas Valley, St Joseph, home yesterday hours after a close male relative of the boy telephoned the police and claimed the child had been abducted by three men.The horror story began around 1 a.m., when the boy’s relative telephoned Maracas Valley police, stating he (the boy) had been kidnapped.The 26-year-old man told officers that around 12.30 a.m. he was at his Santa Rita Trace home, located at the end of the Maracas Royal Road, with the child, Jacob Monroe.He claimed three gunmen broke through his front door and demanded he hand over a gun they said he had. The man told officers he did not know what gun they were talking about. The man said the gunmen then made him slit both his wrists and swallow a cup of pitch oil.The man said the gunmen then grabbed little Jacob and fled the scene.Maracas Valley police took the man to the Eric Williams Medical Sciences Complex, Mt Hope, where was immediately treated for the slits to his wrists as well as the ingestion of the pitch oil. Police said he lost a lot of blood.Later yesterday morning, a team of officers from the Maracas Valley Police Station and the St Joseph Police Station went back to the house to seek more evidence.The Express was on the scene yesterday and witnessed one of the detectives telling his colleagues he found the man’s story “funny” and, fearing the worst, the first thing he opted to do was check the outhouse.There, at the bottom of the pit wrapped in a burgundy-coloured piece of cloth, was the child’s tiny body.Around 2.30 p.m., Monroe’s mother, Sherice Monroe, who lives in a village near Tyrico Bay off the North Coast Road, Maracas, arrived on the scene accompanied by her mother.She was not allowed to speak to reporters and was kept in a police vehicle as detectives scoured the area.Police said when they realised they were dealing with a possible murder and not a kidnapping, two officers were immediately sent to guard the boy’s male relative, who is now the prime suspect.Neighbours told the Express the man lived in the area almost all his life, but they began seeing Sherice Monroe in the area “a couple of months ago”.Most of the neighbours knew her face, but not her name.As the news quickly made its way through the tight-knit community, several residents gathered near the scene.They lamented incidents like this did not occur in their community, while several commented that whoever killed the baby may have been possessed.“That’s real devil ting,” they were heard telling each other.Homicide Bureau detectives are continuing investigations.Trinidad Express Sharing is caring! NewsRegional Trinidad baby horror by: – November 21, 2013 Tweet Share Share 73 Views no discussions
advertisementadvertisementA new poll showed more than 70 percent of likely voters supported a national guest worker program for farm laborers, if such a program included various provisions.Western Growers, an association representing farmers in Arizona and California, whose members produce more than half of the nation’s fresh fruits and vegetables, commissioned the new poll.Progressive Dairyman Editor Walt Cooley discussed the survey results with Ken Barbic (top far right), a Washington, D.C.-based lobbyist for Western Growers, and Brian Nienaber (top right), vice president of the Terrance Group, the national polling firm that conducted the poll. Q. How did you conduct this poll?A. NIENABER: We used a methodology called a random-digit dial to call into many regions of the country. Once we got somebody on the phone, we’d ask him or her: “Are you a registered voter? Do you plan on voting in the November 2012 election?”advertisementIf they told us they’re not very likely to vote, or they’re not registered to vote, then we’d dismiss them from the survey. However, if they met both those criteria, then we’d classify them as a likely voter and proceed with them through the interview.Q. Who did you survey?A. NIENABER: This was a national, all political parties survey. When you look at how people identified by party identification, 43 percent of those polled were Democrats, 40 percent Republicans and 17 percent Independents. We had 1,000 interviews with a margin of error for responses of 3.1 percent plus or minus in either direction.Q. What questions did you ask?A. NIENABER: Western Growers wanted to look at people’s reactions to potential ag worker program provisions, people’s current attitudes on immigration and immigration reform messaging. We asked how much they think immigration is a cause of unemployment, how much they know already about ag worker programs or E-Verify, for example. We got a pretty good idea of where people would go if they were exposed to a long debate about this issue.Q. What is the main takeaway from this poll?advertisementA. BARBIC: The No. 1 takeaway is this: When a sensible ag worker program is laid out to voters, they come back, across voting groups, at 70 percent approval of that program. When those same people hear a series of negative and positive messages about an ag worker program, the kind they would expect to hear in a mainstream media campaign to address both the pros and cons, the approval goes up from 70 to 72 percent. A national ag worker program has a lot of support.Also, when you look at the responses to the question, “Would you be more likely to vote for a member of Congress if they supported such a proposal?,” 64 percent of people said they would be more likely to vote for a member who supported this kind of proposal.This issue gets demagogued. It gets thrown out as a political “third rail” and understandably so because people can take it and turn it into a sound-byte kind of issue. But I think we can actually talk to folks in a reasonable way and lay things out that are sensible. I think voters – Republican, Democrat and Independent – are supportive of doing something.Q. Describe the basics of the ag worker program that those surveyed were presented with.A. BARBIC: The explanation of the program in the survey was not one bill that’s before Congress right now, but rather program components that the ag industry as a whole would be interested in promoting.These provisions include withholding Social Security and Medicare wages for the purpose of giving workers a carrot to return to their home country when their visa is up, permitting ag workers to bring their families with them, allowing existing workers who are here to participate in the program, paying fines if currently in the country and applying as an ag worker and requiring companies to make a reasonable effort to hire Americans first.Q. Which of the components of a potential ag worker program are more palatable in Washington, D.C.?A. BARBIC: The fact is that we’ve got a current workforce that is largely undocumented both in dairy and specialty-crop agriculture. Producers don’t want to see their existing workforce completely disappear and have to find all new people. Opponents of an ag worker program will take anything that we want to do for existing undocumented, or falsely documented, workers and start attaching the word ‘amnesty’ to it.We were encouraged that, even though that particular piece [allowing existing workers to participate] did not poll as well individually, it was still a provision of the entire proposal that polled at 70 percent approval.Q. What was the biggest surprise from this survey?A. NIENABER: The real key question in the survey was when we asked people: “Would you support or oppose an ag worker proposal that had all these elements in it?” I was really struck that it came in 70 percent in favor, 27 percent opposed, and that it had a majority of support. From certain groups you’d expect that response, but there was also a majority of support from people who were very conservative, people who go to church once a week, people who had self-identified as single-issue immigration voters and people who had self-identified as thinking that immigration is a major source of unemployment.Q. Does this survey put to rest a nagging question about or opposition to a national ag worker program?A. BARBIC: Yes, I think we put to rest the contention that voters won’t get behind something like this. Especially in Republican-leaning quarters, there was a sense of, “Well, you say that doing something specifically for agriculture is something people would favor, but where’s the data on that?” Our poll demonstrates pretty comprehensively that actual voters do favor an ag worker program and, in fact, Republican voters favor it in some cases more strongly than Democrats do.Q. Brian, your firm has been doing immigration polling since 2005. What changes in voters’ attitudes toward immigration reform have you observed in that time?A. NIENABER: I really got into this type of polling in 2005; we did some work in support of then-president George W. Bush’s push for comprehensive immigration. What we found there, and seem to have consistently found as we’ve polled on this issue over the years, is that there certainly is a very vocal minority who are real hard-liners on this issue and would like to see some very tough, even draconian measures proposed as a solution.However, the vast majority of people will gravitate toward something that is thoughtful and comprehensive. That was also true with McCain-Kennedy in 2007.Also, for how heated the rhetoric is, you still see, in this survey and others, a good number of Republicans, and Tea Party Republicans, or people who describe themselves as ‘very conservative,’ who think immigration policy reform is a worthwhile and reasonable effort. If you only watch the Lou Dobbs show or heard a handful of people in the Republican Party, you’d think everybody was a hard-liner, and I think this survey indicates that’s not the case.Q. What is Western Growers’ perspective on immigration reform?A. BARBIC: Over the past decade, Congress has attempted to do comprehensive immigration reform several times. We were fine with a comprehensive approach.In agriculture, we have some unique challenges and unique aspects to our production, and so we’ve been making that case over the last decade.If you look at a lot of agriculture-specific jobs, there’s a lot of difficulty getting Americans to do jobs in the field or in dairies, or in some of these more manual labor-related jobs. As we’ve looked at it, we’ve found a lot of that is not so much determined by what wage levels are.Well, we believe there are some other factors going on that keep folks from wanting to do the jobs other than just the financial aspect. I think that a lot of agricultural jobs are just not an attractive option for a lot of folks. I think a lot of the work we’ve done is to educate about how agriculture labor is unique and how having a reasonable, workable ag worker program is not going to jeopardize American jobs because Americans are not going to do these jobs right now.Q. Which half of the aisle is most resistant to ag worker programs?A. BARBIC: Both sides have different resistances. I think you’re going to find on the Democrat side some who want to not do anything that’s not comprehensive immigration reform. If they were to agree to do something in agriculture, say doing something that doesn’t have a pathway to citizenship, it will be difficult for them.And on the Republican side, you’re going to have folks who are going to feel like an ag worker program is going too far, that it’s giving amnesty or rewarding bad behavior. But I think there’s a good group in the center, both Republicans and Democrats, who have been working toward solutions for a long time. They are, frankly, encouraged by the results of this survey.Q. How does this survey address state-based attempts at immigration enforcement or ag worker programs?A. BARBIC: From a Western Growers perspective, we seek a federal solution. This is an issue that is related to federal law. We are of the opinion that we need Congress to act in order to address the problem. I think the states by and large, whether it’s how they deal with ag worker legislation or enforcement, are frustrated.The federal government is not doing their job, and so I think they feel the need to enact measures that will address those problems. If those efforts help the federal government act more quickly, then that’s great.Q. How are the dairy industry’s immigration reform concerns similar or different to Western Growers?A. BARBIC: By and large, a lot of our concerns overlap. One of the key issues for dairies is they need year-round workers, whereas depending on the region, some produce commodities don’t necessarily need a 12-month labor supply. In California, we’re harvesting vegetables the entire year in various parts of the state. There’s a little bit more similarity between us and the dairy industry than, say, an apple grower in Washington state or New York.Q. Is the dairy industry working parallel or perpendicular to your immigration reform efforts?A. BARBIC: I don’t know if there are any significant differences besides a push for year-round labor. I think it’s important for all of agriculture to be on the same page, but it puts dairy in a really tough spot when someone like Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.) is pushing for an agriculture-specific amendment to Rep. Lamar Smith’s (R-Texas) E-Verify bill, as was presented last year. That amendment would have had a 10-month ag worker program in it. Rep. Lungren had determined that was probably as much as was possible in terms of what the politics would allow for in the House.Q. What are the stickiest points of proposing federal ag worker legislation?A. BARBIC: What we do for existing falsely documented workers and the time limit of a ag worker permit are going to be sticky issues to deal with.Q. What’s the next best opportunity to address immigration reform?A. BARBIC: That’s tough to say. It is an election year. But it is also a very interesting time politically. I’ve been in D.C. for a decade now, and it’s a different environment now than I’ve seen previously. While most wouldn’t put money on something happening this year, you never know when a window may open.Q. So the Farm Bill isn’t an option?A. BARBIC: I don’t think the Farm Bill provides a vehicle for this. I think the Farm Bill’s going to be tough enough on its own, and if you start throwing other things into it, then that complicates it even more. We need to see some other immigration-related legislation moving.That’s one of the reasons that the E-Verify legislation was an opportunity to do something. We told Rep. Smith and his staff repeatedly that we were not opposed to E-Verify legislation if a workable ag worker program was included in the legislation, but they didn’t include it.With that said, one of the things that I tell folks is that even if we can’t score a touchdown this year, we still need to move the ball. As long as we’re moving the ball positively down the field, that’s a good thing. Doing this survey was one of those things that I think helps move the ball positively down the field. PDWalt Cooleywalt@progressivedairy.comEditorProgressive Dairyman
Complete ResultsPENSACOLA, Fla. – The No. 9/10-ranked University of West Florida swimming & diving team was as dominant as ever, cruising to a pair of dual meet victories over Birmingham-Southern and Southwestern at the UWF Aquatic Center Friday afternoon. UWF claimed a 195-73 victory over BSC and a 187-83 win over Southwestern. Southwestern defeated BSC in the other women’s competition, while the BSC men claimed a win over SU. Peggy de Villiers, Rebecca Halfast, Madeline Pitt were all part of three victories in the meet. De Villiers was the only swimmer to claim three individual golds, touching first in the 50 Freestyle, 200 Freestyle and 100 Butterfly. Halfast won both backstroke races and led off the final event of the day – the 400 Freestyle Relay – with a strong 100 back that pushed UWF to another victory. Pitt was part of the meet-opening 200 Medley Relay that put UWF in the lead for good and claimed wins in the 200 Butterfly and 200 Individual Medley by nearly six seconds in each swim. Gabrielle Spangenberg and Monica Amaral picked up a pair of wins as well. Spangenberg was also part of the winning 200 Medley Relay and recorded her own individual victory in the 100 Breaststroke before posting the second-fastest 200 Breaststroke on the day 11 events later. Amaral continued her standout performances in the diving well, winning gold in the 1- and 3-meter events, while posting a strong 11-dive score of 489.10 on the low board. Paulina Szydlo also amassed some strong points for the Argonauts, clocking three runner-up times and a gold in the 200 breaststroke. After posting three home victories over the last two weekends, UWF will hit the road next week for the final time before the New South Intercollegiate Swim Conference Championship next month. Friday morning, the Argos will make the 6-hour trip to Cleveland, Miss. for a double-dual meet against No. 5/7 Delta State and No. 39 Henderson State – two of the more formidable teams in the NSISC. The meet is scheduled to begin at 4:00 p.m. Print Friendly Version
Crystal stated in an email, “My son it not perfect, by far. And is known to test his boundaries. Him walking out the gate doesn’t surprise me much as we have been dealing with his poor impulse control since he was 8. The part that appalls me is how the facility addressed the issue afterwards.” Inquiries by KSRM to McLaughlin staff were referred to the media contact who will not be in until tomorrow(Monday). The escape of the two teens was neither confirmed nor denied. His original charges were a series of non-violent thefts, including snack foods from Walmart and a smart tablet from Kenai Middle School according to his mother. Crystal stated Tyler was in McLaughlin after breaking out of a youth facility in Juneau where he and another youth took a car and totaled it while trying to run from officers there. FacebookTwitterEmailPrintFriendly分享A 16-year-old Kenai teen escaped from Anchorage’s McLaughlin Youth Center with another teen Friday night and has not been seen since according to his mother, Crystal Locke.She says officials at the detention center told her that her son, Tyler Sargent, and another boy found a piece of fence by the kitchen that was loose on the night of October 23 during some free time. Crystal says she is concerned for Tyler’s safety in Anchorage because of the lack of communication between the youth detention facility and Anchorage law enforcement who do not seem to be looking for the teens. Kenai Police had not been notified of the teen’s escape, although McLaughlin officials told Crystal that they had left messages for Tyler’s Kenai Probation Officer. Anyone who sees Tyler can contact local law enforcement or Anchorage Police at 907-786-8500.