What Ends Up In My Junkbox...3
More Responsibilities and Goodies...
Hello!
I know that I have not written one of these things in a very long time, but I found a good one this week. This arrived in my Hotmail inbox and it is very interesting:
Greetings
With all due respect, I am looking to work with you to engage in profit oriented ventures in your country and perhaps with your assistance, we could get a good ROI (Return on Investment). This is a Government project that has already been completed but yet to pay out. We can apply for the release of the Contract Sum with any form of foreign Company. I served as Personal Assistant to former Minister of Energy; Jeff Radebe during his short reign. Also I was in charge of signing the Bank Drafts deposited in the Banks for Contract settlement. It is with a good spirit of heart I open up this great opportunity to you.
I contacted you to stand as the partner/Contractor abroad; who can accommodate 70M USD for Investments. The sums are over invoice derived from a Supply Contract carried out by a foreign company with the South African Department of Energy during the short reign of Minister Jeff Radebe who resigned as South Africa Energy Minister on 10th of June, 2019. I am very sensitive and confident to ask for your partnership in re-profiling this fund.
I will reassign the necessary documents to reflect your name and also ensure payment is done to you by the Department of Energy under the auspices of the South African Government. I guarantee we shall implement this transaction under a legitimate arrangement without breaking the law.
(1) 45% for you as the foreign partner
(2) 45% for me
(3) 10% will be set aside to defray all incidental expenses both locally and internationally by me and you during the course of this transaction.
More details will follow upon your reply.
Regards,
Patrick D. Jabulani
This is a little bit better than the usual junk that I find when I am cleaning things up in my email account. First, the spelling is much better than usual (there are some errors with capitalization and forms of address - Greetings? far too vague - but not much else). I also like the names that they have used as well (there actually is a Jeff Radebe and he was both a Minister of Energy and of Justice and Correctional Services in South Africa; Patrick D. Jabulani is more of mystery, although I have found one useful link).
What else do I like about this one? Well, some of the phrasing and language is very interesting (I teach ESL as one of my skills, so this stands out to me). I think profit oriented ventures - he missed the hyphen - could work as a proper term in business seminars and classes for the students in my group who want to handle legal contracts. Also, I am not exactly sure what it means, but re-profiling this fund sounds like it should be something very important. And finally, we have this: Patrick D. Jabulani. I know that some of you might be laughing out loud at this one, but I am sure that there are still many of you who do not get the reference. In the 2010 World Cup, a new football was introduced to the world. It's name came from the Zulu meaning 'Be Happy!' (Jabula). Since the games were hosted by an African nation, this seems perfect, although I would expect a little more originality from someone trying to empty my pockets (and the ball itself was not that popular with the players, either).
So, I wish you well, Mr. Patrick D. Soccer Ball. Just try harder next time.
About the Creator
Kendall Defoe
Teacher, reader, writer, dreamer... I am a college instructor who cannot stop letting his thoughts end up on the page. No AI. No Fake Work. It's all me...
And I did this:
Keep reading
More stories from Kendall Defoe and writers in Criminal and other communities.
The Godfather
This will not be a deep analysis of the history of the film in our culture, or about the current online series “The Offer” (have not seen it yet, except for a few impressive clips online; will handle it one day). This is simply my own feelings about one of the most important films of the last fifty years.
By Kendall Defoe 4 years ago in Criminal
A Mother's Love Lost
It was December 30th, 1988, just two days before the New Year. Jack Dale Walker had convinced a coworker to drive him out to the trailer where his girlfriend lived. Hansel Norton, the co-worker, had known Jack for barely three full weeks. Hansel was trying to be a good friend to this new friend. So, Jack, was young, only 22 years old and appeared to be love sick for the girl who was the mother of his baby.
By Cassie Mooreabout an hour ago in Criminal
Minneapolis ICE Shooting Updates
In recent weeks, Minneapolis has found itself at the center of a growing legal and political controversy following a shooting involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. What initially appeared to be a straightforward federal use-of-force investigation has evolved into a broader dispute between state authorities and federal officials, raising serious questions about transparency, jurisdiction, and accountability. The most significant development so far is the state’s claim that it has been denied access to key evidence related to the incident. As public attention intensifies, the case is no longer just about what happened during the shooting. It is increasingly about who controls the facts, who gets to investigate them, and how justice is supposed to function when federal and state systems collide. What We Know About the Minneapolis ICE Shooting The shooting occurred during a federal immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis. ICE agents were reportedly conducting official duties when gunfire erupted, resulting in injuries and immediate emergency response. Federal authorities confirmed the incident and stated that internal protocols were activated, including an automatic review by federal oversight bodies. From the beginning, details were limited. Officials cited the ongoing nature of the investigation and concerns about officer safety. This lack of information, while not unusual in federal cases, quickly became a point of friction for Minnesota state authorities, who argued that the public deserved clarity and that the state had a legal role to play in examining the incident. State Authorities Push for Transparency Minnesota state officials, including investigators and legal representatives, formally requested access to evidence connected to the shooting. This evidence reportedly includes body camera footage, surveillance recordings, forensic reports, and internal communication logs from the operation. According to state representatives, these requests were either delayed or denied outright. The state has since gone on record stating that it cannot independently assess the legality of the shooting without full access to the materials. This denial has fueled concerns that federal agencies are operating without sufficient external oversight, especially in incidents involving potential civilian harm. State leaders emphasized that their position is not adversarial by default. Rather, they argue that cooperation between federal and state agencies is essential to maintain public trust, particularly in communities already wary of immigration enforcement. Federal Response and Jurisdictional Limits Federal officials, for their part, maintain that the investigation falls squarely under federal jurisdiction. ICE operates as a federal agency, and shootings involving federal officers are typically reviewed internally and, when appropriate, by federal prosecutors or inspectors general. In statements released following the controversy, federal representatives cited legal restrictions that limit the sharing of evidence during an active investigation. They also stressed that premature disclosure could compromise witness testimony or investigative integrity. This explanation, while legally grounded, has done little to ease state frustrations. Critics argue that “ongoing investigation” has too often been used as a blanket justification for withholding information, even in cases where transparency could prevent misinformation and public unrest. Community Reaction and Public Trust The Minneapolis community has responded with a mix of concern, anger, and fatigue. For many residents, particularly in immigrant and marginalized communities, the shooting has reopened long-standing fears about aggressive enforcement tactics and lack of accountability. Community leaders and advocacy groups have called for the immediate release of non-sensitive evidence, arguing that transparency is a prerequisite for trust. Peaceful demonstrations and public forums have highlighted a broader demand: that no law enforcement agency, federal or otherwise, should be beyond scrutiny. Local officials echoed these concerns, noting that Minneapolis has spent years attempting to rebuild trust between residents and law enforcement. The perception that evidence is being withheld threatens to undermine that progress. Legal Implications of Denied Evidence From a legal standpoint, the state’s inability to access evidence raises complex questions. While federal agencies do have authority over their operations, states also have a responsibility to investigate deaths or injuries occurring within their borders. Legal experts suggest that this dispute could set a precedent. If states are routinely blocked from reviewing evidence in federal use-of-force cases, it may limit their ability to pursue independent inquiries or bring charges under state law when applicable. Some analysts believe the issue could ultimately be resolved in court, with judges determining whether the state has a legal right to access certain materials. Such a ruling could have national implications, influencing how future federal-state conflicts are handled. Political Dimensions of the Case The Minneapolis ICE shooting has also taken on a political dimension. Immigration enforcement remains a deeply divisive issue, and incidents like this tend to amplify existing ideological divides. State officials critical of federal immigration policies view the denial of evidence as symptomatic of a larger lack of accountability. Meanwhile, supporters of strict federal enforcement argue that state interference could hinder effective operations and put officers at risk. This political tension complicates the path forward. What might otherwise be a procedural disagreement risks becoming a symbolic battle over immigration, law enforcement authority, and states’ rights. What Happens Next? As of now, the investigation continues under federal oversight, while the state explores its legal options. Negotiations between state and federal officials have reportedly not been ruled out, suggesting that a compromise could still be reached. Potential next steps include limited evidence sharing under confidentiality agreements, congressional inquiries, or judicial review. Each option carries its own risks and consequences, both legally and politically. What remains clear is that public pressure is unlikely to fade. Minneapolis residents, like many Americans, are demanding clarity, fairness, and accountability in cases involving law enforcement use of force. A Broader Conversation About Accountability The Minneapolis ICE shooting is no longer just a single incident under investigation. It has become a lens through which broader issues are being examined: the balance of power between federal and state authorities, the limits of transparency, and the role of public oversight in a democratic society. Whether or not the state ultimately gains access to the evidence, the controversy has already sparked an important conversation. How that conversation translates into policy, practice, or reform remains to be seen, but its impact will likely extend far beyond Minneapolis. In the end, accountability is not only about assigning blame. It is about ensuring that systems function openly and fairly, especially when lives are affected. The outcome of this case may help determine how well those principles are upheld in the future.
By Saboor Brohi 7 days ago in Criminal
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.