Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

June 27, 2006
By: Kevin Drum

NEWS YOU CAN USE!....Andy Leipold is guest blogging at the Volokh Conspiracy this week. His subject is the conventional wisdom in the law biz which holds that judges are far more likely to convict defendants of crimes than juries are. You know the rap: juries are easy to confuse, easy to emotionally manipulate, and just generally mushy. Judges, who have seen it all, ignore the BS and look straight at the evidence. If it's there, you're guilty.

Guess what? It's not true. As the chart on the right shows, conviction rates for juries in federal cases have risen from 60% to 85% in the past half century, while conviction rates in bench trials before a judge have declined from 90% to about 50%. But why? Could the type of crime involved violent, property, drug, etc. explain the disparity? Leipold says no. Is it because guilty defendants tend to pick jury trials while innocent ones prefer judges? Maybe, but then why the substantial change over time?

Leipold will be blogging about this all week, and his full paper is here. I'm linking to it just in case any of my readers get in trouble with a federal rap and need to decide what kind of trial they want. Apparently the answer is: a bench trial. And I'll bet it's quicker and cheaper too. I hope Rush Limbaugh knows about this.

Kevin Drum 2:04 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (49)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

I actually discussed this study with a panel of judges a couple months ago.

the problem remains (as you noted) that defendants in bench trials are a self-selected group...what effect that has on the overall numbers I don't know.

but yeah, its interesting stuff.

Posted by: Nathan on June 27, 2006 at 2:06 PM | PERMALINK

Talking of Rush, I read that someone has just found a herd of goats in Dominican Republican soar in their behinds and walking funny.

Posted by: nut on June 27, 2006 at 2:11 PM | PERMALINK

Anyone whose ever sat through a jury trial knows that that conventional wisdom is a crock.

As someone whose covered several trials, including a capital murder trial, I believe strongly that jury's are prone to vote guilty. The O.J. Simpson case, which everybody uses to argue the opposite, was an exception, when the defense was much more experienced and had much greater resources than the prosecutor.

That's not the case in most jury trials. It's just human nature to assume that the prosecutors are the good guys and the defense attorneys are the bad guys. Or, at the very least, you would assume they are both professionals, but they have different roles. It's a natural assumption the prosecutor wouldn't have proceeded with a case unless he knew the defendant was guilty, whereas the defense lawyer's job is to just defend his client, ignoring his guilt or innocence.

The more confusing a case gets, the more likely the jury is going to just throw up its hands and go back to those assumptions, and vote guilty.

Judges have far more experience looking over evidence and making judgements than a juror. Many judges are also former defense lawyers, and are more likely to be sympathetic to their case.

Posted by: Alex Parker on June 27, 2006 at 2:14 PM | PERMALINK

Perhaps the first thing that should be explained is the huge drop in the percentage of bench trial guilty verdicts between ~1988 (maybe even ~1980) and ~1991.

Posted by: Jeremy on June 27, 2006 at 2:18 PM | PERMALINK

You might want to forward this to your fifth column friends at the New York Times. Treason, violating the Espionage Act, reckless endangerment of human life... they're in a lot of trouble.

Posted by: American Hawk on June 27, 2006 at 2:19 PM | PERMALINK

"You know the rap: juries are easy to confuse, easy to emotionally manipulate, and just generally mushy. Judges, who have seen it all, ignore the BS and look straight at the evidence. If it's there, you're guilty. Guess what? It's not true."

Guess, what you are vastly overstating the case made. I read the link, it isnt anywhere nearly as definitive as your statement makes it out to be.

Of course, guess what, it might not be true, isnt as sensationalistic.

The selection process of how cases end up in front of juries or judges may explain more of the change.

"Is it because guilty defendants tend to pick jury trials while innocent ones prefer judges? Maybe, but then why the substantial change over time?"

This is just an off the cuff hypothesis, but one is that victims rights movement has taken off with the result that the prosecutor having more input on when a jury is used. In many states if the defendant waives the right to jury, the prosecutor can still insist on it. I havent done the research but I suspect either this has not always been the case but is increasingly so.

Second hypothesis. The article confirms the conventional wisdom is that juries are easier to get by for defendants, whether or not this is true in reality. Has this always been the belief? If not then the development of the belief might explain some of the shift as well.

Third hypothesis: Juries are more likely to convict on some types of crimes and less likely to convict on others. Now that prosecutors can insist on jury trials they could be putting more of these case in front of juries that used to go to judges.

Fourth Hypothesis: I notice this is federal crimes. Has their been an anlysis of the types of crimes pursued in federal courts that perhaps used to be pursued in state courts or vice-versa.


Posted by: Catch22 on June 27, 2006 at 2:22 PM | PERMALINK

nut,

Ooookay. So we have a bunch of goats soaring inside their own behinds, and all this is itself taking place somewhere in the bowels of a Dominican Republican. Tell me what you had for breakfast, so that I can avoid it. Multiple layers of reality I can deal with, but this bowels-within-bowels stuff is a bit much. (This is why I read Salman Rushdie's Grimus only once.)

The discussion at Volokh is looking very interesting. Some commenters theorize that the sharp turn in the graph has to do mainly with mandatory minima being imposed on many Federal crimes, and judges being unhappy with it. Seems plausible to me, if you combine it with the theory Leipold paraphrases from Posner.

Posted by: waterfowl on June 27, 2006 at 2:26 PM | PERMALINK

How dare you brings facts and research into the conventional wisdom. You're probably some kind of commie liberal.

Posted by: craigie on June 27, 2006 at 2:31 PM | PERMALINK

I think the answer is that a judges are better equipped through training to limit their consideration to the facts properly placed into evidence, whereas a jury is more likely to make improper inferences about things like the defendant not testifying on his own behalf or other "where there's smoke" types of conclusions.

Posted by: jacob on June 27, 2006 at 2:31 PM | PERMALINK

"Treason, violating the Espionage Act, reckless endangerment of human life... "

What is the Bush Administration?

Posted by: nutty little nut nut on June 27, 2006 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINK

Why the change over time? Because the bamboozlement bias now favors guilty verdicts. The country has gone over a right wing cliff.

Posted by: Nonplussed on June 27, 2006 at 2:34 PM | PERMALINK

"You might want to forward this to your fifth column friends at the New York Times. Treason, violating the Espionage Act, reckless endangerment of human life... they're in a lot of trouble."

You might want forward this to your fat friend Rush: sexual exploitation of children, illegal drug possession, parole violations...he's in a lot of trouble.

Posted by: brewmn on June 27, 2006 at 2:43 PM | PERMALINK

waterfowl

I am glad that my little oversight helped you soar to unpreceented heights.

Posted by: nut on June 27, 2006 at 2:47 PM | PERMALINK

My off the cuff response would be that judges see these kind of crimes all the time, and they feel like they can tell which criminals are truly dangerous to society and which criminals are people who just screwed up really badly.

Jurors on the other hand don't have the experience and it's all to easy to demonize the defendants so that jurors will believe their the incarnation of Satan or something.

Posted by: MNPundit on June 27, 2006 at 2:51 PM | PERMALINK

As someone whose covered several trials, including a capital murder trial, I believe strongly that jury's are prone to vote guilty.

Hope you have a good copy editor.

Posted by: foul water on June 27, 2006 at 2:54 PM | PERMALINK

My guess is there has been a change in the politics of prosecutors, who now seem to pursue convictions and death penalties simply for public consumption and political gain, not the public good. Mr. Leipold's hypothesis holds, but it is the prosecutors who are manipulating dumb fuck American juries to win convictions, not defense attornies.

Prosecutors want to win whether the defendant is guilty or not. They always ask for the maximum penalty. They always want the political plum of a captital death sentence, even if the perpetrator is ten years old. They withold evidence. They encourage police to fabricate evidence. They give convicted felons time off for testifying against their targets. They manipulate the public with fear through the media. I am not a fan of prosecutors, who should be searching for justice instead of political gain. Anathema upon them.

Posted by: Hostile on June 27, 2006 at 3:20 PM | PERMALINK

And Rush and I did not have sex with those "goats".

Posted by: American Hawk on June 27, 2006 at 3:30 PM | PERMALINK

Prosecutors represent me. Defense attorneys (I knew there was something wrong with my previous post's spelling) do not. That is why I am so vehemently opposed to prosecutors who pursue convictions for political gain rather than to protect the public. I told that to a federal prosecutor once. I was left off of the jury.

Posted by: Hostile on June 27, 2006 at 3:31 PM | PERMALINK

How did this butter wind up on my chin?

Posted by: American Hock on June 27, 2006 at 3:33 PM | PERMALINK

I've been on one jury trial (state, not federal). The prosecuters didn't have any credible evidence, but it still took us a little while to hash this out, to get over the fact they'd bring such a non-case to trial. When we aquitted the guy, the judge came back and thanked us so effusively that it was clear she was surprised we'd come up with the right decision.

Posted by: Boronx on June 27, 2006 at 3:33 PM | PERMALINK

Speaking of Rush again, I hope Alberto Gonzales has unleashed his crack team (hopefully not the one that nabbed the hapless seven from the Miami ghetto) on investigating the activities of the latest most famous tourist to Dominican Republic, which is known to be a destination for mongerers according to Wikipedia, which also says the following:


Federal law (see PROTECT Act of 2003) prohibits United States citizens or permanent residents to engage in international travel with the purpose or effect of having commercial sex with a person under the age of 18, or any sex with a person under the age of 16; the age of consent in the target country is irrelevant. Facilitating such travel is also illegal.

Posted by: nut on June 27, 2006 at 3:36 PM | PERMALINK

Hostile,

Prosecutors want to win whether the defendant is guilty or not. They always ask for the maximum penalty. They always want the political plum of a captital death sentence, even if the perpetrator is ten years old. They withold evidence. They encourage police to fabricate evidence. They give convicted felons time off for testifying against their targets. They manipulate the public with fear through the media. I am not a fan of prosecutors, who should be searching for justice instead of political gain. Anathema upon them.

I really don't think most prosecutors really delight in convicting innocent people; and I don't think sentencing a ten-year-old to execution is ever a "political plum," exactly. As for "manipulating the public with fear through the media," would you rather see government "manipulate the public" into a feeling of security by, say, encouraging local newspapers not to report the odd murder or two? I mean, it might not work, people having eyes, ears, friends, and neighbors; but it might be worth a try. I suspect that most prosecutors spend most of their time interacting with the media wishing that the media would disappear, but that's just a guess.

Anyway, Leipold is talking about Federal trials here, so your garden-variety murder case isn't even part of the discussion.

Posted by: waterfowl on June 27, 2006 at 3:42 PM | PERMALINK

Some number of cases fall into the category of likely guilty, but not proven beyond reasonable doubt. Judges would know they need to acquit in such cases; juries might not. As evidence of this consider this case where a jury convicted someone of murder by flipping a coin. This category of cases probably explains some of the difference.

Also, as has been pointed out over at Volokh, there is a self-selection bias. Innocent defendants want to make sure there's no mistake made, and thus go with the judge who's trained and somewhat accountable for his/her actions. guilty defendants hope there might be a mistake, and thus go with the jury.

Posted by: eeyn524 on June 27, 2006 at 3:45 PM | PERMALINK

So - not only does Rush violate his parole, but we know he violates Federal Law by going to other countries to get his prescription drugs cheaper.

I guess a Free Market is only for those who can afford to fly to the Dominican Republic.

Posted by: Pink on June 27, 2006 at 3:56 PM | PERMALINK

My off the cuff response would be that judges see these kind of crimes all the time, and they feel like they can tell which criminals are truly dangerous to society and which criminals are people who just screwed up really badly.

Posted by: tldd on June 27, 2006 at 4:04 PM | PERMALINK

tldd (although technically wrong, I think) suggests a hypothesis.

In the old days, judges could think, "Well, he's probably guilty, but he's not very bad, so I'll convict him and then give him probation."

With the advent of binding sentencing guidelines, however, judges knew they would have to impose imprisonment in such cases, often lengthy imprisonment. So they began to take the reasonable doubt standard really seriously. And convictions dropped off.

Now, since a recent Supreme Court decision, the federal guidelines are no longer binding (although the Circuit Courts of Appeals seem to think they are). It will be interesting to see if there's a change in judges verdicts. (Or perhaps there won't be any change, since judges in most circuits get reversed if they give probation when the guidelines don't call for it and the government appeals. The guidelines are, at the bottom end, still more or less mandatory in most circuits.)

Posted by: David in NY on June 27, 2006 at 4:29 PM | PERMALINK

AH nails it.He is right the White house should listen to AH what with all the plants they put in the NYT you where refering to Judith Miller where you not AH.

Posted by: Consevative and Ugly on June 27, 2006 at 4:34 PM | PERMALINK

Actually, there are two, probably independent, phenomena. Juries convicting more, judges less.
I say the guidelines explain the latter, but the former is an interesting question.

Posted by: David in NY on June 27, 2006 at 4:36 PM | PERMALINK

would you rather see government "manipulate the public" into a feeling of security...Leipold is talking about Federal trials here

The Moussaoui trial was federal, and the prosecutors ony wanted the death penalty for political reasons. The whole case was cooked up to obtain a death sentence for Republican political gain. It was the judge who brought justice into that court. What I want is for prosecutors to serve justice and find out the truth, not become little Vyshinsky's.

Posted by: Hostile on June 27, 2006 at 4:54 PM | PERMALINK

These terrorists don't deserve either a jury or a judge. We treat them better at Guantanamo than they were treated in their home country by their Mullahs. We even give them some R&R in the form of naked pyramid building. What we really should do is just execute them on the battlefield. The moment they think any anti-american or anti-christian thoughts. . . BOOM! Kill the bastards. Every last one of them. Until they learn to think like we do.

Posted by: American Fuck on June 27, 2006 at 4:56 PM | PERMALINK

eeyn524 - your link does not work. It's unclickable ...

Posted by: royalblue_tom on June 27, 2006 at 5:07 PM | PERMALINK

The scary thing is: the higher jury conviction rates could mean that lots of defendants are being falsely convicted.

Posted by: Neil' on June 27, 2006 at 5:10 PM | PERMALINK

In America lots of defendants are being falsely convicted by juries, and judges are sentencing them to prison.

Posted by: Hostile on June 27, 2006 at 5:15 PM | PERMALINK

Hostile,

The Moussaoui trial was federal, and the prosecutors only wanted the death penalty for political reasons. The whole case was cooked up to obtain a death sentence for Republican political gain. It was the judge who brought justice into that court.

I admit that merely trying very hard to massacre thousands of people and failing to do it because your stupid butt landed you in jail when the massacre was supposed to go down isn't quite the same thing as actually succeeding. I think Moussaoui got more or less what he deserved. Do you agree, or do you think there was no evidence sufficient to convict him of anything? After all, through no fault of his own, he didn't hurt anyone; and his alleged co-conspirators are all dead and unavailable to interrogate. (Well, OK, his immediate co-conspirators are.)

Posted by: waterfowl on June 27, 2006 at 5:22 PM | PERMALINK

The only to really check out the hypothesis is to present the same case to juries and judges, and see if they aggee or not. I read a number years ago about one study did just this and found a high level of agreement. Of course, that is only one study, and it may be that things have changed since then.

Posted by: Les Brunswick on June 27, 2006 at 5:27 PM | PERMALINK

Oops, that should be "present the same cases to juries and judges"

Posted by: Les Brunswick on June 27, 2006 at 5:28 PM | PERMALINK

David in NY, that is MY hypothesis, as if you'll look at my post a ways above his: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_06/009087.php#910501 you will see that he simply copy and pasted my paragraph. That pisses me off about tldd, don't just copy and paste my stuff--in the same damn thread. I hope you were trying to express agreement or something that got cut off.

Anyhow, it's been literally 2 years since I did any kind of work with sentencing guidelines so you may very well be right about them. But that still wouldn't explain why juries are convicting more often -- so let me offer another idea.

I was taught that the US justice system goes in rough cycles, deterence vs. rehabilitation and that we are long overdue for a rehabilitation phase but that it might be related to sentencing guidelines. The person who taught me honestly did not know why the pendulum had not swung back -- I believe it to be a result of the right wing usurpation of media etc. so that they can really drum in the desire to punish or get revenge into society.

Posted by: MNPundit on June 27, 2006 at 5:43 PM | PERMALINK

I think it is the job of government to protect its citizens. Sometimes it means incarcerating people because they are a threat to life and/or property. I brought up the Moussaoui case because it was federal and the prosecutors wanted a death penalty result for political reasons, not to protect anyone. I made no comment about whether Moussaoui deserved incarceration, which I think he does. If the prosecutors would have thought they could not win a death penalty, they probably would not have brought Moussaoui to trial when they did.

Posted by: Hostile on June 27, 2006 at 5:54 PM | PERMALINK

Andrea Yates is in the news again, new trial. It was when this terrible crime occurred that I began to suspect the motives of prosecutors. The same day this crime was revealed, the local prosecutor held a news conference to express his horror of the crime and to announce he would seek the death penalty. The crime was horrible. I felt revulsion, as I am certain most others did, but I do not think it is a prosecutor's place or work description to announce his/her revulsion of a crime at a press conference. The only reason that DA did what he did was for political gain. He used the deaths, the horrible deaths, of those children to further his political ambitions. Ensuring Ms. Yates received the death penalty did not increase the protection of the citizens of that jurisdiction.

Waterfowl, do you agree, or do you think there was sufficient reason to seek Ms. Yates' death and that the DA was only acting as the custodian of the public will?

Posted by: Hostile on June 27, 2006 at 7:08 PM | PERMALINK

Rush is going to be indicted tomorrow. I have thirty-four unimpeachable sources on this.

Posted by: truthout on June 27, 2006 at 7:23 PM | PERMALINK

royalblue: Sorry, I couldn't get the link tag to work. This is the URL for the coin-flipping jury.

http://overlawyered.com/archives/00may1.html#000501b

Posted by: hf on June 27, 2006 at 7:29 PM | PERMALINK

I've worked at a U.S. District Court for 5 years, and I've never heard of a criminal case going to a bench trial.

Maybe it just doesn't happen in our district.

Posted by: Anon Computer Geek on June 27, 2006 at 9:14 PM | PERMALINK

Ah, I see that the paper includes misdemeanor offenses, such as traffic offenses, which overwhelmingly go before a U.S. magistrate judge.

Posted by: Anon Computer Geek on June 27, 2006 at 9:51 PM | PERMALINK

One of the interesting things I learned is that the defendant doesn't have the absolute right to a bench trial- the prosecutor can veto it, and the judge will usually then force the defendant in front a of a jury.

Posted by: Yancey Ward on June 28, 2006 at 11:17 AM | PERMALINK

It's a surprise, but not a shock.

Almost all judges are lawyers (all on the federal bench, most on the state benches - in fact, the only place it's fairly common for non-lawyer judges to preside over criminal hearings, that I am aware of, is the justice-of-the-peace courts in Texas).

Most lawyers are "softer-on-crime" (or more protective of our rights, depending on your perspective) than the average American.

Do the math.

Posted by: Jim D on June 28, 2006 at 12:16 PM | PERMALINK

Hostile,

Ack. Sorry, ought to have responded ages ago.

Waterfowl, do you agree [with me], or do you think there was sufficient reason to seek Ms. Yates' death and that the DA was only acting as the custodian of the public will?

Well, now. It seems to me that if you're going to have capital punishment at all (I'm opposed, if it matters), then deliberately murdering five small children sounds like the sort of crime you'd want it applied to. The death penalty obviously would come up only if Yates were (a) found competent to stand trial; and (b) convicted, meaning (among other things) not found not guilty by reason of insanity. If someone evidently well aware of what she was doing killed five helpless people, then she's a mass murderer, and if we're to have a death penalty at all, it would seem odd not to apply it to mass murderers.

And then you have to understand the press-conference thing. I really don't think DAs generally seek them out; they're hounded until they give one during every "high-profile" (read: involves young white woman, public figure, gruesome details, several deaths, or as many of the above as possible) case. I agree, though, that a prosecutor ought to do his/her best to dodge the sentence question until there's actually a conviction.

Posted by: waterfowl on June 28, 2006 at 9:00 PM | PERMALINK

上海浩洋泵阀向大家推荐: 阀门 电磁阀 调节阀 球阀 蝶阀 闸阀 隔膜阀 隔膜泵 离心泵 水泵 电动阀门 气动阀门 气动阀 煤气电磁阀 不锈钢电磁阀 水用电磁阀 蒸汽电磁阀 防爆电磁阀 自立式调节阀 电动调节阀 气动调节阀 衬氟调节阀 波纹管调节阀 电动精小型调节阀 电动球阀 气动球阀 三通球阀 电动调节球阀 气动蝶阀 电动蝶阀 电动调节蝶阀 电动截止阀 电动闸阀 电动隔膜泵 气动隔膜泵 管道离心泵 排污泵 磁力泵 过滤器 止回阀 截止阀 减压阀 安全阀 水利控制阀 衬氟阀门 刀型闸阀 化工泵 自吸泵 多级泵 螺杆泵 液下泵 潜水泵 屏蔽泵 油泵 消防泵 给水设备 阻火器 呼吸阀 液位计 视镜 疏水阀 放料阀
专业搜索平台,提供全球成功学品牌公司及产品展示。北京 家教 厂向广大客户提供家教产品及家教服务。要想寻找曾仕强信息请访问 曾仕强 网,各种曾仕强应有尽有。余世维 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的余世维,丰富余世维行业资讯助您成交。中国 陈安之 网,打造陈安之领域专业搜索平台,提供全球陈安之品牌公司及产品展示。您想要了解 法律 吗?请到中国法律网来寻找法律。要想寻找搬家信息请访问 搬家 网,各种搬家应有尽有。要想寻找上海婚庆信息请访问 上海婚庆 网,各种上海婚庆应有尽有。上海 论文网 公司专业生产论文网产品,欢迎选择论文网。要想寻找上海火车票查询信息请访问 上海火车票查询 网,各种上海火车票查询应有尽有。启帆室内装潢 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的启帆室内装潢,丰富启帆室内装潢行业资讯助您成交。中国 西装 网,打造西装领域专业搜索平台,提供全球西装品牌公司及产品展示。北京 取名 厂向广大客户提供取名产品及取名服务。北京 搬家 厂向广大客户提供搬家产品及搬家服务。您想要了解 搬家 吗?请到中国搬家网来寻找搬家。进口商 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的进口商,丰富进口商行业资讯助您成交。北京 上海翻译公司 厂向广大客户提供上海翻译公司产品及上海翻译公司服务。北京 余世维 厂向广大客户提供余世维产品及余世维服务。您想要了解 曾仕强 吗?请到中国曾仕强网来寻找曾仕强。北京 陈安之课程 厂向广大客户提供陈安之课程产品及陈安之课程服务。搬家 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的搬家,丰富搬家行业资讯助您成交。中国 搬场 网,打造搬场领域专业搜索平台,提供全球搬场品牌公司及产品展示。您想要了解 搬场 吗?请到中国搬场网来寻找搬场。

我向大家推荐:上海 WOW gold 公司专业生产WOW gold产品,欢迎选择WOW gold。中国 China Marketing Research 网,打造China Marketing Research领域专业搜索平台,提供全球China Marketing Research品牌公司及产品展示。中国 China Market Research 网,打造China Market Research领域专业搜索平台,提供全球China Market Research品牌公司及产品展示。上海 school playground equipment 公司专业生产school playground equipment产品,欢迎选择school playground equipment。commercial playground equipment 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的commercial playground equipment,丰富commercial playground equipment行业资讯助您成交。您想要了解 granite countertop 吗?请到中国granite countertop网来寻找granite countertop。上海 Kitchen Cabinet 公司专业生产Kitchen Cabinet产品,欢迎选择Kitchen Cabinet。北京 Marble Fireplace 厂向广大客户提供Marble Fireplace产品及Marble Fireplace服务。北京 Granite Monument 厂向广大客户提供Granite Monument产品及Granite Monument服务。要想寻找Curtain Design信息请访问 Curtain Design 网,各种Curtain Design应有尽有。北京 Curtain Design 厂向广大客户提供Curtain Design产品及Curtain Design服务。北京 sql database recovery 厂向广大客户提供sql database recovery产品及sql database recovery服务。recover sql server data 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的recover sql server data,丰富recover sql server data行业资讯助您成交。要想寻找.mdf file repair信息请访问 .mdf file repair 网,各种.mdf file repair应有尽有。您想要了解 .mdf repair 吗?请到中国.mdf repair网来寻找.mdf repair。sql server repair 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的sql server repair,丰富sql server repair行业资讯助您成交。北京 sql recovery 厂向广大客户提供sql recovery产品及sql recovery服务。北京 recover sql server database 厂向广大客户提供recover sql server database产品及recover sql server database服务。要想寻找oracle database recovery信息请访问 oracle database recovery 网,各种oracle database recovery应有尽有。您想要了解 recover oracle 吗?请到中国recover oracle网来寻找recover oracle。北京 access repair 厂向广大客户提供access repair产品及access repair服务。要想寻找access recovery信息请访问 access recovery 网,各种access recovery应有尽有。北京 sql data recovery 厂向广大客户提供sql data recovery产品及sql data recovery服务。中国 sql server database recovery 网,打造sql server database recovery领域专业搜索平台,提供全球sql server database recovery品牌公司及产品展示。您想要了解 oracle recovery 吗?请到中国oracle recovery网来寻找oracle recovery。北京 sql server recovery 厂向广大客户提供sql server recovery产品及sql server recovery服务。上海 Oracle Database Recovery 公司专业生产Oracle Database Recovery产品,欢迎选择Oracle Database Recovery。中国 SQL Data Recovery 网,打造SQL Data Recovery领域专业搜索平台,提供全球SQL Data Recovery品牌公司及产品展示。北京 Access Database Repair 厂向广大客户提供Access Database Repair产品及Access Database Repair服务。北京 blushing 厂向广大客户提供blushing产品及blushing服务。Bed and Breakfast Rome 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的Bed and Breakfast Rome,丰富Bed and Breakfast Rome行业资讯助您成交。中国 solar energy 网,打造solar energy领域专业搜索平台,提供全球solar energy品牌公司及产品展示。中国 silicon 网,打造silicon领域专业搜索平台,提供全球silicon品牌公司及产品展示。您想要了解 renewable energy 吗?请到中国renewable energy网来寻找renewable energy。中国 silicon cell 网,打造silicon cell领域专业搜索平台,提供全球silicon cell品牌公司及产品展示。北京 ballast 厂向广大客户提供ballast产品及ballast服务。bed and breakfast rome 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的bed and breakfast rome,丰富bed and breakfast rome行业资讯助您成交。中国 LED lighting 网,打造LED lighting 领域专业搜索平台,提供全球LED lighting 品牌公司及产品展示。北京 Galvanized Iron Wire 厂向广大客户提供Galvanized Iron Wire 产品及Galvanized Iron Wire 服务。要想寻找speaking roses信息请访问 speaking roses 网,各种speaking roses应有尽有。北京 LED Undercar Kit 厂向广大客户提供LED Undercar Kit 产品及LED Undercar Kit 服务。北京 speaking roses 厂向广大客户提供speaking roses产品及speaking roses服务。北京 bed and breakfast rome 厂向广大客户提供bed and breakfast rome产品及bed and breakfast rome服务。北京 Facial Blushing 厂向广大客户提供Facial Blushing产品及Facial Blushing服务。您想要了解 Marble Medallion 吗?请到中国Marble Medallion网来寻找Marble Medallion。北京 Granite Monument 厂向广大客户提供Granite Monument产品及Granite Monument服务。上海 Natural Slate 公司专业生产Natural Slate产品,欢迎选择Natural Slate。要想寻找Carved Sculpture信息请访问 Carved Sculpture 网,各种Carved Sculpture应有尽有。北京 Stone Carving 厂向广大客户提供Stone Carving产品及Stone Carving服务。北京 China Marble 厂向广大客户提供China Marble产品及China Marble服务。要想寻找Mattress covers信息请访问 Mattress covers 网,各种Mattress covers应有尽有。Marble Column 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的Marble Column,丰富Marble Column行业资讯助您成交。北京 Marble Fountain 厂向广大客户提供Marble Fountain产品及Marble Fountain服务。北京 Mosaic 厂向广大客户提供Mosaic产品及Mosaic服务。北京 Stone Bathtub 厂向广大客户提供Stone Bathtub产品及Stone Bathtub服务。您想要了解 Granite Countertop 吗?请到中国Granite Countertop网来寻找Granite Countertop。您想要了解 Stone Sink 吗?请到中国Stone Sink网来寻找Stone Sink。您想要了解 Marble Fireplace 吗?请到中国Marble Fireplace网来寻找Marble Fireplace。中国 ballast 网,打造ballast领域专业搜索平台,提供全球ballast品牌公司及产品展示。上海 LED Undercar Kit 公司专业生产LED Undercar Kit产品,欢迎选择LED Undercar Kit。北京 LED lighting 厂向广大客户提供LED lighting产品及LED lighting服务。您想要了解 silicon solar cell 吗?请到中国silicon solar cell网来寻找silicon solar cell。solar cell 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的solar cell,丰富solar cell行业资讯助您成交。您想要了解 silicon cell 吗?请到中国silicon cell网来寻找silicon cell。中国 renewable energy 网,打造renewable energy领域专业搜索平台,提供全球renewable energy品牌公司及产品展示。solar energy 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的solar energy,丰富solar energy行业资讯助您成交。北京 solar module 厂向广大客户提供solar module产品及solar module服务。中国 silicon solar cell 网,打造silicon solar cell领域专业搜索平台,提供全球silicon solar cell品牌公司及产品展示。

我向大家推荐:您想要了解 市场调研 吗?请到中国市场调研网来寻找市场调研。要想寻找美容美发培训学校信息请访问 美容美发培训学校 网,各种美容美发培训学校应有尽有。中国 市场调查公司 网,打造市场调查公司领域专业搜索平台,提供全球市场调查公司品牌公司及产品展示。北京 市场调查公司 厂向广大客户提供市场调查公司产品及市场调查公司服务。要想寻找市场研究公司信息请访问 市场研究公司 网,各种市场研究公司应有尽有。北京 资信调查 厂向广大客户提供资信调查产品及资信调查服务。要想寻找资信调查信息请访问 资信调查 网,各种资信调查应有尽有。

Posted by: mark on June 30, 2006 at 11:37 PM | PERMALINK

test

Posted by: mark on June 30, 2006 at 11:38 PM | PERMALINK

我向大家推荐:中国 叉车租赁 网,打造叉车租赁领域专业搜索平台,提供全球叉车租赁品牌公司及产品展示。中国 压滤机 网,打造压滤机领域专业搜索平台,提供全球压滤机品牌公司及产品展示。超声波清洗机 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的超声波清洗机,丰富超声波清洗机行业资讯助您成交。北京 吸塑机/高频机 厂向广大客户提供吸塑机/高频机产品及吸塑机/高频机服务。北京 离心机 厂向广大客户提供离心机产品及离心机服务。清洗机 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的清洗机,丰富清洗机行业资讯助您成交。粉碎机 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的粉碎机,丰富粉碎机行业资讯助您成交。上海 工程机械 公司专业生产工程机械产品,欢迎选择工程机械。北京 二手挖机 厂向广大客户提供二手挖机产品及二手挖机服务。露点仪 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的露点仪,丰富露点仪行业资讯助您成交。传动机械 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的传动机械,丰富传动机械行业资讯助您成交。北京 减速机 厂向广大客户提供减速机产品及减速机服务。北京 汽车吊 厂向广大客户提供汽车吊产品及汽车吊服务。上海 挖掘机 公司专业生产挖掘机产品,欢迎选择挖掘机。中国 压路机 网,打造压路机领域专业搜索平台,提供全球压路机品牌公司及产品展示。中国 除湿机 网,打造除湿机领域专业搜索平台,提供全球除湿机品牌公司及产品展示。要想寻找二手挖掘机信息请访问 二手挖掘机 网,各种二手挖掘机应有尽有。二手挖掘机 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的二手挖掘机,丰富二手挖掘机行业资讯助您成交。北京 减速机 厂向广大客户提供减速机产品及减速机服务。上海 升降机 公司专业生产升降机产品,欢迎选择升降机。太越减速机 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的太越减速机,丰富太越减速机行业资讯助您成交。北京 二手挖掘机 厂向广大客户提供二手挖掘机产品及二手挖掘机服务。要想寻找鹤壁通用机械厂信息请访问 鹤壁通用机械厂 网,各种鹤壁通用机械厂应有尽有。仓壁振动器 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的仓壁振动器,丰富仓壁振动器行业资讯助您成交。防闭塞装置 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的防闭塞装置,丰富防闭塞装置行业资讯助您成交。中国 电磁振动给料机 网,打造电磁振动给料机领域专业搜索平台,提供全球电磁振动给料机品牌公司及产品展示。要想寻找离心机信息请访问 离心机 网,各种离心机应有尽有。北京 离心机 厂向广大客户提供离心机产品及离心机服务。减速机 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的减速机,丰富减速机行业资讯助您成交。上海 平衡机 公司专业生产平衡机产品,欢迎选择平衡机。喷码机 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的喷码机,丰富喷码机行业资讯助您成交。您想要了解 二手挖掘机 吗?请到中国二手挖掘机网来寻找二手挖掘机。您想要了解 升降机 吗?请到中国升降机网来寻找升降机。缠绕包装/包装机械 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的缠绕包装/包装机械,丰富缠绕包装/包装机械行业资讯助您成交。您想要了解 制药机械 吗?请到中国制药机械网来寻找制药机械。二手挖掘机 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的二手挖掘机,丰富二手挖掘机行业资讯助您成交。中国 二手挖掘机 网,打造二手挖掘机领域专业搜索平台,提供全球二手挖掘机品牌公司及产品展示。北京 牡丹离心机 厂向广大客户提供牡丹离心机产品及牡丹离心机服务。上海 齿轮减速机/蜗轮减速机 公司专业生产齿轮减速机/蜗轮减速机产品,欢迎选择齿轮减速机/蜗轮减速机。上海 挖掘机 公司专业生产挖掘机产品,欢迎选择挖掘机。中国 磁选机 网,打造磁选机领域专业搜索平台,提供全球磁选机品牌公司及产品展示。离心机 网上批发市场,为您提供优质低价的离心机,丰富离心机行业资讯助您成交。上海 橡胶机械 公司专业生产橡胶机械产品,欢迎选择橡胶机械。中国 标记机/打标机 网,打造标记机/打标机领域专业搜索平台,提供全球标记机/打标机品牌公司及产品展示。北京 |蜗轮减速机/摆线减速机 厂向广大客户提供|蜗轮减速机/摆线减速机产品及|蜗轮减速机/摆线减速机服务。北京 挖掘机 厂向广大客户提供挖掘机产品及挖掘机服务。北京 登车桥 厂向广大客户提供登车桥产品及登车桥服务。北京 升降平台 厂向广大客户提供升降平台产品及升降平台服务。北京 升降台 厂向广大客户提供升降台产品及升降台服务。中国 移动式升降机 网,打造移动式升降机领域专业搜索平台,提供全球移动式升降机品牌公司及产品展示。北京 机械手/真空吊具/真空吸盘 厂向广大客户提供机械手/真空吊具/真空吸盘产品及机械手/真空吊具/真空吸盘服务。上海 激光切割机 公司专业生产激光切割机产品,欢迎选择激光切割机。要想寻找叉车信息请访问 叉车 网,各种叉车应有尽有。

Posted by: dd on July 1, 2006 at 2:03 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly