Levenson, Michael. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html.
For my current event, I read the New York Times article by Michael Levenson entitled “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. The Case Was Just Solved.” The article discusses the tragic murder of high school sweethearts Duane Bogle and Patricia Kalitzke. Although the pair died in 1956, Detective Sgt. Jon Kadner of the Cascade County Sheriff’s Office in Montana was put in charge of the case in 2012. While police reports from the time of crime show an array of possible subjects, the case previously lacked definitive DNA evidence to identify the killer. By using genetic genealogy, which uses DNA evidence to identify potential suspects by identifying the relatives of the suspect, the Cascade County Sheriff’s Office was able to determine Kenneth Gould as the likely killer. Although Gould died in 2007, the revelations regarding the 1956 killings are nonetheless significant as proof of the importance of new DNA technology.
While Levenson only talks about one specific case within his article, the DNA technology he mentions has profound implications on forensic science as a whole. With genetic genealogy, law enforcement can work to solve what was once considered unsolvable--crimes from decades past can be given closure as new technological innovations allow us to more accurately identify suspects, bringing justice to the victims and families that had previously lost hope.
I really enjoyed Levenson’s article; it was concise, interesting, and well-written. He introduces the topic in an intriguing way that draws the reader inward, while also explaining the science behind the new DNA technology in simple, understandable terms. I only wish that Levenson could have elaborated more on her concluding point, which talked about the emotional impact that such revelations can have on the family of the suspect. I thought this was a very interesting topic and I would have liked to see him analyze the implications of this new technology a bit more.
posted for E. Burnell
19 comments:
Ty Chermsirivatana
9-15-21
Forensics
Current Event 1
Burnell, Elizabeth. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.” Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved, 15 Sept. 2021, bhscsi.blogspot.com/2021/09/two-montana-sweethearts-were-fatally.html.
I personally liked Elizabeth’s review of the article. It highlights the main idea of the article and it neatly presents the tragic story of two high school sweethearts who were murdered in cold blood. Not only does it do the aforementioned but it also shines a light on the impact that DNA technology has in the present day. Even when cases that occurred in 1956 about 50 years are being cracked open and given new life through DNA. It linearly follows the process of who the couple was, what type of genetic technology was being used(genetic genealogy in this case), how it was employed which in this case was done by tracing relatives and eventually finding the killer down the ancestral tree. In short, I liked Elizabeth’s clear and concise points, the way she laid out the process, the mentioning how not only does this bring closure to the families left unanswered but also the showcase of technologies employed in the criminal justice context.
Now while Elizabeth wrote a stellar review, there are a few caveats I would like to explore though there are very few. One point is that she could have been a bit more detailed. After reading through the article, I would’ve liked to know a bit more specifically about how the investigators built a family tree based off of the DNA profile extracted from a sperm cell or how they were able to link said DNA profile from the sperm cell by taking DNA from the victim’s kids and cross-referencing them together to find any matches and/or patterns, that would have been cool to read about. In short, more detail present besides just the generalization of the article would have been nice. Another one is the length of the article. This ties into the last point because personally, it would have been nice to see more depth to the articles not only in details but also in wording. While the review was thorough and iterated its point well, it could have benefited from a longer article with more detail and precision. Besides that, however, it’s important to state this is a bit of nitpick because it was done well and one of the only stipulations of this article from an editorial perspective is the lack of just a bit more detail.
Elizabeth wrote a phenomenal review of this article. It gives a lot of perspective on how not only forensic investigators are bringing people closure and peace but also it shows that the technology of the present is making waves of impact from those still living in the past. It highlights the remarkable technological progression and leaps in DNA technology. It’s beautiful how the cold relics of the past can be solved simply by applying the technologies of today. The review of the article was concise, clear and delivered the reviewer’s thoughts well into the page. Besides the lack of a bit more detail, it was a short yet sweet review of an article that shows the leaps of innovation that humankind makes in only a few decades.
In this Current Event, Levenson discusses the outcomes of the ‘Montana Sweethearts’ and how the killer was uncovered with the help of modern DNA technology. The revelations in genetic genealogy help to solve this case, and Elizabeth well employs the effects this modernization of technology has. She does a thorough job of realizing the improvements this article could have and stating her opinion without bias. The summarizing of the article was concise and highlighted the key ideas, making the current event enjoyable to read.
As for areas of improvement, I found the review of the article lost me a bit, especially in the second paragraph. The transition from paragraph one to paragraph two is not as smooth as it can be; I think this could be corrected by going a bit deeper into why the genetic genealogy is helpful to other cases and how big of a deal this discovery was. Another aspect I would fix is delving into the effects of these new technologies because right now, the reader can only process how this helped one suspect. I would edit this by finding more examples of how others were aided by these modernizations.
This review and article were both very intriguing reads, and I was shocked by how much one discovery can impact the forensic world. Knowing how much one discovery can impact so many cases/people is interesting and I will now continue to research more on these developments.
Ippolito, Charles. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. The Case Was Just Solved.” Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved, 1 Jan. 1970, bhscsi.blogspot.com/2021/09/two-montana-sweethearts-were-fatally.html
Levenson, Michael. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html.
In this article is about the murder of Particia Kalizke and Duane Bogle who were shot in 1956. However, using new DNA technology, Cascade County Sheriff’s Detective Sgt. Jon Kadner was recently able to determine the killer. The killer of these high school sweethearts was Kenneth Gould who passed away in 2007.
The new DNA technology is a major advancement in forensic technology. The DNA technology is going to help forensic scientists complete crimes from decades ago, and solve the newer crimes quicker and more efficiently. Considering that this new technology solved a crime from 1956, this technology will certainly change the way law enforcement solves crimes.
I thought that Elizabeth’s Article was incredibly interesting. While she gave a lot of information on the case itself, I wish she would’ve gone further into detail about the new DNA technology. Other than that, the article is really well written and easy to understand. She did a wonderful job.
Finn Ruhanen
9/16/21
Forensics
Mr. Ippolito
Citation:
Levenson, Michael. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html
Link to Review:
https://bhscsi.blogspot.com/2021/09/two-montana-sweethearts-were-fatally.html
For this week’s comment, I decided to talk about Elizabeth’s review of the article, “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. The Case was Just Solved”. Three things that were done well by Elizabeth were her overall summary of the article. She explains how originally there were forensic setbacks since there was not enough DNA evidence. The second thing that she does well is give a clear explanation of what the new forensic technology was. She effectively explains that DNA genealogy allowed for the relatives of the suspect to be identified. Finally, the last thing she does well is explain how this new technology and method changes the scope of forensics. She explains that this discovery will help solve many past cases that were left unsolved due to a lack of genetic information.
While she did many positive things, there were two specific things that she could have worked on in her review. First, she explains that DNA can be connected to relatives. However, she could have gone a step further and for those who don’t know, explained specific examples of what kinds of DNA would be used to connect this. On top of that, she could have given a general scope of how many unsolved cases would be solved from this new method of forensics. This would help give a scope of how monumental this discovery is.
My learning experience in this review was very positive. The review was extremely specific and I was left informed about almost all aspects of the topic. I chose this review because I was very surprised to hear that a case from 1965 was only recently solved. This changes my outlook on life because it teaches me that new discoveries are always happening and as we go on in time we will always be evolving.
In her writeup, Elizabeth did a lot of good things. First, she made me understand very clearly what the article was about from the beginning. She also explained the context of the murder quite well. In addition to this, she even included a detail about how she wanted more information from the author, as she was intrigued by the emotional effect that these findings had on the families of the victims. One thing that Elizabeth could have done better was go more in depth on the specific technology used in the genealogy that she described. Another thing she could improve on would be the details of the murders. I, for some morbid reason, love to hear about all of the intricacies of crime, and how and why it was committed. The one A-HA moment for me was learning about the DNA genealogy and making the connection to some recent current events news. Apparently using any sort of DNA tracker or ancestry finding website will put your DNA into the system and you can be tracked down using this DNA genealogy system. Great work overall Elizabeth.
This paper deals with the murder of the 1956 fired Particia Kalizke and Duane Bogle. Cascade County Sheriff's Detective Sgt. Jon Kadner was able to find the killer, though, utilizing modern DNA technology lately. Kenneth Gould died in 2007 was the killer of these high school sweethearts. A key development in forensic technology is the new DNA technique. The DNA technology will allow forensic experts to solve the later crimes faster and more efficiently. Given the fact that the new technology solved 1956 crimes, the manner law enforcement resolves crimes will likely change.
I felt it was really interesting to Elizabeth's Article. I wish she would have gone into more detail on new DNA technologies even though she presented a lot of information regarding the case itself. The text is otherwise very well written and easy to comprehend. She's done a fantastic task.
Phoebe Matthews
Mr. Ippolito
Forensics
9/20/21
Current Event #2
Levenson, Michael. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html.
https://bhscsi.blogspot.com/2021/09/two-montana-sweethearts-were-fatally.html
This article is about the shooting deaths of Particia Kalizke and Duane Bogle in 1956. Cascade County Sheriff's Detective Sgt. Jon Kadner was recently able to identify the killer using modern DNA testing. The case previously lacked definitive DNA evidence to identify the killer. By using genetic genealogy, which uses DNA evidence to identify potential suspects by identifying the relatives of the suspect, the Cascade County Sheriff’s Office was able to determine Kenneth Gould as the likely killer. Although Gould died in 2007, the revelations regarding the murders are significant as proof of the importance of new DNA technology.
The new DNA technique represents a significant leap in forensic technology. DNA technology will assist forensic experts in solving older crimes as well as solving current crimes more quickly and efficiently. Given that this new technology solved a case from 1956, it is safe to say that it will revolutionize the way law enforcement solves crimes.
I thought that Elizabeth’s Article was incredibly interesting. However, I wish she would’ve gone further into detail about the new DNA technology. By providing more detail on the DNA technology, the readers would have been able to understand how it helps cases today as well as how it can help solve cases that were left unsolved.
Olivia Prior
Mr. Ippolito
Forensics
9/23/21
2nd Current Event
Citation:
Levenson, Michael. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. The Case Was Just Solved.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html
Link to Review:
https://bhscsi.blogspot.com/2021/09/two-montana-sweethearts-were-fatally.html
This article, “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. The Case was Just Solved”, focuses on the shooting and death of Particia Kalizke and Duane Bogle in 1956. Because of new DNA technology, Cascade County Sheriff’s Detective Sgt. Jon Kadner was just recently able to determine the killer. The killer of these high school sweethearts was Kenneth Gould who passed away in 2007. Something Elizabeth did well was she summarized the article with the perfect amount of information to captivate the reader. I also liked the fact that she emphasizes the importance and significance of modern and evolving DNA technology because it has enabled us to make important discoveries. She explains that tech improvement will help solve many past cases that were left unsolved due to a lack of genetic information. The third good thing that she did was she states what the new forensic technology was. Elizabeth says that with DNA genealogy, which allowed for the relatives of the suspect to be identified, they were able to solve the case.
An area Elizabeth could improve on is balancing out the information she presents(content wise). She does a great job of introducing the reader to the case and states why they faced the setbacks that they did. However, when it came to explaining the new DNA improvements I was a bit disappointed. Elizabeth explains that genetic genealogy was used but doesn’t explain the steps it took to get there. Another aspect that can be improved upon is explaining the extent to which this improvement helps solve past and future cases. I think it would have been cool to find out how many previously unsolved cases can now be solved.
Reading Elizabeth's review and the article itself was a great learning experience because it was very well organized and I was able to learn about many new things. I chose this article because I was intrigued right after reading the title and I wanted to learn how a murder from decades ago was suddenly just solved. This changed my outlook on case conclusions because this reminded me that even though cases might be unsolvable during the time of the investigation, it doesn’t mean it will stay that way forever.Technology is constantly evolving so new discoveries can always be made.
Luke Sheehan
9/23/21
Forensics
Current event 2
Link to review:
https://bhscsi.blogspot.com/2021/09/two-montana-sweethearts-were-fatally.html
Link to actual article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html
For this current event article, I chose to read and comment on Elizabeth Burnells review of the article about a shooting case that was just solved about two Montana sweethearts. In Elizabateh’s review, there were many aspects to it that made it a great review. The first thing that I noticed that made this a great review was the evidence that she provided. One piece of evidence that helped her emphasize the point of the article was when she talked about new DNA technology that was used to find the potential killer. They used genetic genealogy to figure out that the potential killer was Kenneth Gould. The second thing that she did really well was how she explained how technology is impacting forensic science, she explains that old cases can now be solved. Elizabeth wrote that this new technology will not allow for forensic scientists to identify suspects from years prior, “bringing justice to the victims and families that had previously lost hope.”. The last thing I think Elizabeth did really well was voice her opinion, she explained how she was extremely interested in the topics discussed and how the terms were very understandable allowing for her to learn quickly. This is important because it shows that she cares about the article.
Although this was a very great review, I do think that there were some rooms for improvement. The first thing that she could have done better was quoting the author. She could have provided some direct quotes. This would have made some of the information she stated more concrete and would have allowed the reader to understand what the author was trying to say. It would provide a little bit more understanding. The second thing that I think Elizabeth could have done better was being a little less broad. If she took the time to include some other cases that included this type of DNA identification that solved cases, it would have shown that she went the extra mile to provide her readers with all the necessary information.
This was an extremely positive learning experience for me because I did not know that forensic science was able to accomplish this, it was extremely interesting to read and learn more about the topic. The title is what drew my attention and made me want to read, an unsolved case from the 50s getting solved now is crazy. This will change my understanding of forensic science because it just shows that new technology is always being created to allow for more and more cases to be solved more efficiently. Who knows what we will be able to accomplish in 10 more years.
- Luke Sheehan
Manu Monogenis
Mr. Ippolito
Forensics
9/23/2021
https://bhscsi.blogspot.com/2021/09/two-montana-sweethearts-were-fatally.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html
For this week's current event I read Eliza’s review of “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. The Case Was Just Solved.” The first thing I thought Eliza did well was her initial summary and introduction of the article. She talks about how there were forensic setbacks because there wasn't enough DNA evidence. She also gave a very clear explanation of what new forensics science technology was used in this investigation. The final thing I found that was done well as the implications for this newly introduced technology. She states that this technology will help forensic scientists solve older unsolved cases from years past.
Eliza generally wrote a great review. But with any great review comes negative aspects. The first thing I personally think that could have been done better is in her critique section. She could have gone more in-depth with her analysis of how the author described the new technology. I found it to be a pretty underwhelming reveal and Eliza could have referenced that. The second thing I think could be improved is DNA. When referencing DNA and its connection to relatives. She could have gone a step further and stated the parts of the DNA that are really connected through genetics and blood.
Overall enjoyed this article a lot because of the new forensic technology discovered. That was the main thing that attracted me to write this review. The fact that the mystery from 1956 was finally solved shows how much technology has advanced. Despite a slight lack of detail, I think it was a very nice and simple review that shows the innovation that mankind can make in just a few decades.
Levenson, Michael. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html.
https://bhscsi.blogspot.com/2021/09/two-montana-sweethearts-were-fatally.html
The article is about the killing of Patricia Kalizke and Duane Bogle from 1956 that went cold for decades. Using new DNA technology the county sheriff was able to identify the killer. The case went cold for so long due to the lack of DNA evidence, but with new advancements they were able to finally solve the crime. The solving of the crime shows a massive leap in DNA technology and also asks the question of how many cases like this are out there. While the article is cool and interesting, it doesn't go into the specifics of this new DNA technology that helped them solve such an old case .
Tyler Tanaka-Wong
Mr. Ippolito
Forensics EF Odd
9/23/21
Levenson, Michael. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html.
In her review of Michael Levenson's “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.”, Elizabeth Burnell talks about new DNA technology has solved a relatively old crime case. In 1956, a couple was fatally shot and killed, and since there wasn't advanced technology back then, the killer was not traced. However, with recent technology, the police identified Kenneth Gould as the perpetrator, but he had died back in 2007.
I think that Elizabeth did an excellent job introducing the case, but I wish that she elaborated more on two things. First, I think that she could've explained more on why the crime wasn't solved back then. I also think that she could've elaborated on the current state of DNA technology, give more opinions on the implications of rising technology.
I really enjoyed reading this article because I find technology breakthroughs very intriguing, and I would like to see more breakthroughs in the future.
Brody Pearlman
Citation:
Levenson, Michael. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html.
In Elizabeth's review of Michael Levenson's “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.”, she is able to display the new DNA technology and resources in forensic science to help solve the case. The example of this was genealogy, as they were able to trace back the killers using relatives. By doing this they were able to determine Kenneth Gould as the likely killer, but he had passed in 2007. Despite him passing, for a crime committed in 1956 of the double murder, it was good to see that the advancements in forensic science had increased massively since that time.
While the review by Elizabeth was great, there were a couple of things to improve apon. First I had wished that she explained how or why the case was reopened in 2012, such as new evidence. In addition, a explanation on if Gould wasn't suspected back in 1956 and his relation to the couple.
I enjoyed reading both the article and the review, as the recent breakthroughs in technology have been extremely helpful to our communities in solving old cases and deterring future ones.
Levenson, Michael. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html.
https://bhscsi.blogspot.com/2021/09/two-montana-sweethearts-were-fatally.html
The article is about the killing of Particia Kalizke and Duane Bogle which happened in 1956. The sheriff of the county where the killing happened was recently able to solve the crime decades later. The case was solved using new DNA technology that wasn’t available when the murders originally happened. Back in 1956 the police weren’t able to find enough DNA evidence to arrest anyone , but now with new technology they were able to find out who did it. Although the killer had already passed away this is still a great leap and there are most likely other cases like this out there. The new DNA technology will greatly assist law enforcement in solving cases that were previously believed to have gone unsolved. Although the article is very interesting, it doesn’t go into great depth about what this new technology is and how it helped law enforcement solve the crime. The reader is left feeling confused about this new technology since the author never tells us how it helped law enforcement solve the crime or even how this new technology came to be.
Levenson, Michael. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html.
https://bhscsi.blogspot.com/2021/09/two-montana-sweethearts-were-fatally.html
The article is about the killing of Particia Kalizke and Duane Bogle which happened in 1956. The sheriff of the county where the killing happened was recently able to solve the crime decades later. The case was solved using new DNA technology that wasn’t available when the murders originally happened. Back in 1956 the police weren’t able to find enough DNA evidence to arrest anyone , but now with new technology they were able to find out who did it. Although the killer had already passed away this is still a great leap and there are most likely other cases like this out there. The new DNA technology will greatly assist law enforcement in solving cases that were previously believed to have gone unsolved. Although the article is very interesting, it doesn’t go into great depth about what this new technology is and how it helped law enforcement solve the crime. The reader is left feeling confused about this new technology since the author never tells us how it helped law enforcement solve the crime or even how this new technology came to be.
Eglis Gjonpalaj
9/25/21
Forensics
Current Event Comment
I really enjoyed this review of Elizabeth’s. It was effective in grabbing the reader's attention and keeping it interesting. She is straight to the point in what happened and what technology was important. I also like the way she presented the case and how she felt about the article writer’s focus on genealogy and how it affects the world today. I think the reader could have created a better article if she researched more on genealogy and maybe highlighted some of it in her writing. I think she could have given a little more focus on the case and the backstory behind it. One aspect that completely blew me away is the fact that a case from 1956 could be solved today. It is good that the family can have closure and finally rest this case after being active for so long.
Eglis Gjonpalaj
9/25/21
Forensics
Current Event Comment
Levenson, Michael. “Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/us/great-falls-montana-2007-homicide-dna.html.
I really enjoyed this review of Elizabeth’s. It was effective in grabbing the reader's attention and keeping it interesting. She is straight to the point in what happened and what technology was important. I also like the way she presented the case and how she felt about the article writer’s focus on genealogy and how it affects the world today. I think the reader could have created a better article if she researched more on genealogy and maybe highlighted some of it in her writing. I think she could have given a little more focus on the case and the backstory behind it. One aspect that completely blew me away is the fact that a case from 1956 could be solved today. It is good that the family can have closure and finally rest this case after being active for so long.
Three aspects of the review that were presented well include the following. First off, I feel like the author did a good job presenting the topic of the situation using some background information. Next the author clearly provides us with the argument of “the case previously lacked definitive DNA evidence to identify the killer.”. Finally the author provides us with her perspective on the case.
I have two critiques on how the review could have been better. One being that us as a reader need a little more context of how the case was solved. Also a little more detailing about the case in general and what took place during the case. Other than those two critiques the article was short and simple with good points.
Throughout this article I learned something and was impressed by it. I learned about the process of genetic genealogy. Genetic genealogy is the use of genealogical DNA tests, i.e., DNA profiling and DNA testing, in combination with traditional genealogical methods, to infer genetic relationships between individuals. I thought this was very interesting.
Review on E Burnell: Two Montana Sweethearts Were Fatally Shot in 1956. the Case Was Just Solved
I thought that this review was concise and informative. Firstly, the summary, being paragraph one, was well written and connected the focal point of the article (being the murder case), to its scientific discovery and importance. Secondly, I thought analysis on the genetic genealogy was well done, and interesting to read about (especially wth how it helped the case). Thirdly, I thought Elizabeth did a good job on the scientific (or modern day) relation, with her second paragraph, explaining why the genetic genealogy has been used in many cases to help reunite families ad give them hope for justice.
I think the Elizabeth could have elaborated a little more on the primary application of this technology (if the article talked about it); was this the first murder case in which the genetic genealogy was used? I also think that there could have been some more elaboration on the current application of genetic genealogy (although her summary was already sufficient).
I really was unfamiliar with the idea of genetic genealogy and am fascinated by its technology and ability to trace siblings (but it makes sense). I wish I could have learnt more about how it is used today specifically, with similar cases from years ago but also how it's used in modern cases.
for S. Blazejczak
Post a Comment