A Rarity in this Country

Many months have gone by since the Murdaugh murder trial sent shivers of schadenfreude through the United States' collective spine. Murdaugh lost that one bigtime, and it should be noted that nowadays, his lawyers are asking for a new trial, hoping to get their notorious client off on the second go-round. Maybe they will, it remains to be seen, and I'll be sure to disseminate the information in this space when I find out. But I really doubt that a second trial,if it ever happens, will be as sensational as the first. That one kept me glued to my TV screen, hoping the rare thrill of watching an American oligarch called to account would never end. My attorney brother and I, a retiree from the criminal justice system, armchair-quarterbacked thr whole process, texting joyfully back and forth. It was better than the Superbowl! For those of you who have been living abroad, or under a rock, I recount: Last winter, South Carolina lawyer Alex Murdaugh was convicted of killing his wife Maggie and their 22-year-old son Paul on June 7,2021. Both were slaughtered in the darkness of their hunting lodge stables,with multiple gunshots to their head,chests and wrists. The patriarch claimed to have "found" their mutilated bodies-- until cell phone data placed him at the crime scene the very instant before their horrible deaths. However,his motive was hard to formulate, because... who in his right mind would butcher his own family? Prosecutors alleged that his business-related woes made him crazy (he'd been fired by his law firm for embezzlement). But I suspect that's just part of it: the guy stood, as they say down in Florida, up to his ass in alligators. His wife and son had become inconvenient. His wife was contemplating a costly divorce and little Paul had stirred up serious trouble by causing a female friend's death in a boating accident (he'd been drunk while steering the ill-fated boat). Now the boy was under indictment and facing a civil trial for wrongful death. Initially, Dad tried to smokescreen the mess by attempting to manipulate others involved in the tragedy, but the community reacted with indignation. No doubt this came as a surprise to him; generations of political and legal dominance in South Carolina had empowered his family to get away with just about anything. However, little Paul was still indulging in the type of behavior that had gotten him into serious trouble to begin with. Still drinking and boating with his buddies--his father must've felt he was impossible to control. Easier to kill him. At that time, the Murdaughs were also suspect in two other murders: that of their longtime housekeeper,who'd stumbled upon evidence of Alex Murdaugh's opioid drug addiction, and a gay male villager rumored to be "dating" Buster, the Murdaugh's older, allegedly straight son. Both of these unfortunate individuals had damning information on the Murdaughs, so it 's believed that the Murdaughs did something about it--even though both of these murders remain unsolved. Good thing that on March 2,2023, the dynasty got nailed on OTHER charges: Alex Murdaugh was found guilty of four counts of murder and weapons possession and sentenced to two consecutive life sentences without parole. The judge closed by telling Murdaugh that the ghosts of his murdered wife and son would visit him every night in jail. The prosecution wasted no time singing its own praises. They paraded their staff before the cameras. They congratulated each other before the microphones. This was a big deal, indeed. "This is how it's done right here in South Carolina,y'all", they intoned. "Here,justice will prevail no matter who you are or what you have, or what yo' daddy's last name wuz". Too bad it took about a century for South Carolina justice to catch up to this family, who once exercised almost Gothic control of the area. But let's not dwell on that. Let's just celebrate that it was finally done,and that those betting Alex Murdaugh would get off scott free lost their bets. The Murdaugh conviction was nothing short of a miracle; it's easy to become cynical in this country, where justice applied effectively to the rich and powerful is a rarity. Take Donald Trump, another wealthy white patriarch repeatedly accused of crimes, not against individuals, but against the ENTIRE United States. Yet, despite the bipartisan uproar, the public indignation and even all the recently uncovered evidence of his wrongdoing (some of it from his own mouth) Trump still walks free--and one has to ask, for how long?

Stinkbombs in the Piñata

Many years ago, when my son was a 4th grader, I decided to celebrate his birthday in school. It was easier, with a ready-made guest list (his classmates, a captive audience), plenty of space in the school gym, and no worries about cleaning. I only had to buy a cake and candles, and, for entertainment,throw in a piñata.At the time, he was attending private school in a serene enclave north of NYC. The invasion of Puerto Ricans from the Bronx hadn't started yet--so nobody in the school knew from Piñatas. They had never seen or heard of such an object. They marveled at the prospect, overcome with the joyous anticipation of breaking up the thing and getting showered by candy. It was up to me to stuff the Piñata with goodies, so I did. But while I wasn't looking, my son snuck in several stinkbombs. The following day, a general uproar ensued when unsuspecting kids got enveloped in a cloud of putrid smells. School administrators shuttered the gym for two days, and my son's teacher almost got fired. Thank God I wasn't there, and I must note that in the end, nothing of consequence happened. But such is life. Stinkbombs in a piñata. Sometimes, the nastiest things come in pretty wrappings.

This is the case with the United States Supreme Court, an august group of individuals in lofty black robes. They're supposed to spout wisdom from those distinguished mouths, be a beacon of justice and fairness while lesser institutions descend into mudslinging partisanship.Instead, this Court, where rabid conservatives reign Supreme, amuses itself throwing stinkbomb decisions at a population that mostly hates its rulings. Last year, the court practically outlawed abortion in large parts of the US. This year, it weakened gun control,refused to secure access to water for the Navajo Nation, weakened labor unions' right to strike, and promoted discrimination against gays. Most recently, the court outlawed affirmative action, the practice of using race as a determining criteria for minority students in college admissions. Now race will become only one of several factors in the process of judging candidates for admission. So, is that a bad thing? Depends on who you ask, and how. Personally, I believe there are some stinkbombs in the Affirmative Action piñata. Of course, liberal black and white activists-- I haven't seen or heard too many Latinos- have set up a prodigious howl. This move, they say, will surely eliminate impoverished minorities' access to higher education. But the American public is curiously faceted on the subject. According to surveys,the majority opposes the Supreme Court being able to rule on Affirmative Action, yet it disagrees with the concept of race as a determining factor in college admissions. Moreover,this whole thing has come about because another minority, Asian students,sued Harvard University, alleging that it had used Affirmative Action to discriminate against them and favor black and brown students. It has also been said that Affirmative action doesn't really help impoverished minorities, who cannot afford college anyway. Instead, it favors middle and upper class minorities, who really don't need it because they have the advantages of affluence. Maybe the real objection is to eliminating Affirmative Action as a quick and easy way to expand minority elites. Because,you see, this ruling affects only a handful of elite institutions, the Harvards,Yales and Princetons that privileged kids compete for in large numbers. You certainly don't need Affirmative Action to get into community college, or most state-funded universities, or even run-of-the-mill private schools. All you need is a decent grade point average and the means to pay for tuition that is usually too high, even at the humblest schools. We need tuition reform for everyone more than Affirmative Action for the few. Some steps in that direction have already been taken: the Federal Government issues undergraduate grants based not on race, but on income. And they're fairly easy to obtain (you can even get help filling out the application). Finally, as a former civil servant, I've witnessed the results of the kind of tacit Affirmative Action that's practiced in government offices. Through it, and the cronyism it engenders, too many unqualified individuals manage to gain supervisory positions. This, to the detriment and disillusion of genuinely qualified employees.

El Precio de Tu “Fama”

De nuevo me entristeces, Juan Guillermo. No me sé ningún tango que le cuadre a la situación, sólo me viene a la mente un antiguo pasodoble ("Donde estás corazoooooon, n'oigo tu palpitaaar, es tan grande el dolooooor, que no puedo llorar...". De hecho, "es tan grande el dolor", que debo expresarlo aquí en español, sin el filtro de lo aprendido). Alma mía, te quise a pesar de tus rabiosos conceptos políticos de extrema derecha, tan opuestos a los míos--idiotas y torcidas que somos las mujeres. ¿Y dónde estás, corazón? Me enteré que andas por otros planetas. Hace tiempo que te había perdido la pista pero tu imagen resurgió, ahora con la estridencia de algo feo y equivocado. Y digo "imagen" por que estos días, solamente te veo por televisión en las noticias--de pasada, entre otras caras. Pero ahí estás.Y si alguna vez te creíste demasiado importante para mí, esto ya te coloca decididamente fuera de mi alcance. Tengo, sin embargo, el amargo consuelo de mi despecho. Me alegra ver que estás metiendo la pata en grande...¡y en público! Me pregunto cómo te irá en el falso mundillo de Washington, donde hacen caso solamente a quienes puedan ofrecer algo a cambio. Y tú no tienes nada concreto que ofrecer-- ni dinero, ni posición, ni influencia. Vienes de Nueva York, donde bastan la simpatía y la buena pinta para abrir puertas, y las dos cosas te sobran, cariño. Pero eres demasiado directo para un ambiente de hipocresía, eres todo inocencia en bruto: peleas con los puños y no la cabeza, boconeas sin base, sin pensar, no disimulas tus ansias de llamar la atención, tu desesperación por ser famoso. Y me imagino que en Washington te creerán burdo, primitivo. El caso es que te has colocado de asesor de un político tan deshonesto, que varios miembros de su propio partido están pidiendo su renuncia. El tipo es un gordo prieto y afeminado, repulsivo, descarado. Logró ganar su elección a base de mentiras que se han descubierto desde su victoria: mentiras sobre quién es, donde estudió, donde trabajó, de dónde sacó tanto dinero para su campaña, cómo se convirtió en millonario de la noche a la mañana. Se dice que es aliado secreto de oligarcas rusos, y que es un estafador. Cuentan cómo se lanzó a recaudar fondos para costear la cura del perro enfermo de un soldado veterano. El gordo terminó robándose lo recaudado, y el pobre perro murió sin atención médica. El tipo también es un desfachatado de proporciones olímpicas. Cuando vivía en Brazil, se disfrazaba de mujer y participaba en bailes, cabarets y concursos para transformistas-- hay fotos que aparentan comprobarlo. Antes de hacerse congresista, aspiraba al título de Miss Brazil Marica (Miss Gay Brazil). Por ladrón, lo están investigando varias entidades gubernamentales (incluyendo el Gobierno de Brazil, donde alegan que se robó una chequera y gastó lo que no era suyo). Con todo, el tipo no quiere renunciar. Van a tener que acusarlo formalmente de algún crimen para sacarlo pataleando de la Cámara de Representantes de los E.U. Y mira tú, ESO es lo que estàs defendiendo ante el mundo, vida mía, sólo que no hay defensa posible, pues todo lo que dicen sobre tu estrafalario cliente està resultando cierto. Lo único que te queda es insultar a quienes lo acusan, y correrle detrás a ese gordo--uno más de su séquito de charlatanes--por los pasillos del Capitolio. ¿No te da vergüenza? ¿No te da asco? ¿No te preocupa tu reputación? Parece que no. Lástima que pese a tus esfuerzos, los medios informativos mayormente te ignoran, mencionándote sólo para burlarse. En las plataformas sociales del Internet, la gente se pregunta si en verdad existes, o si eres un invento más del gordo descarado. Ya ves, esa fama que buscas a cualquier precio de todo modos te elude. Y en algún momento, el gordo te abandonará, si puede rodearse de gente mejor conectada (de hecho, ya lo está haciendo). O si lo botan del Congreso. Ya ni te usa de vocero, pues prefiere acapararse el resplandor de la notoriedad. No creo que vaya a servir de vehículo para tu propia fama. Ahora estoy viendo que tú también estás gordísimo, tan bello que eras, y me pregunto si es por infelicidad, depresión o angustia. Si tuvieras algo de conciencia y mejor criterio, podría creerlo. Pero sabiendo lo que sé, lo tengo que dudar

.

So, tell us… what race are we?

Last night, the dolce far niente of my retirement was interrupted by a telephone pollster from the NYS Deparment of Health and the Siena College Research Institute. The guy said I'd been selected "randomly" for a survey, but was a little too vague about how the gathered information would be used.At first, I was sorely tempted to beg off, then decided that for 10 minutes of my time, I could be a good sport. And the interview unfolded pleasantly enough, covering my opinions on everything from the legal drinking age to breastfeeding in public. However, things came to a screeching halt when he asked me my race. I told him I really didn't know and I was not joking: you see, I'm whiter than some folks, not as white as others. My son (photo above) claims that, like critters in the bush, I have "protective coloring" because of my light hair, skin and eyes.He says I can almost "pass" for white; although of course, I'm not. My son subscribes to American absolutist notions of race because he grew up in the States, and because he cannot be mistaken for anything but brown. It's true that race is not totally a social construct--there are visual considerations as well. Some people are unmistakably white, black or Oriental. In between, there's a whole range of skin shades: race is a spectrum, a continuum from pale to tan and black. And to date, there aren't enough little boxes on paper to check off and identify everyone's place on that spectrum. But really,it should depend on the mirror: you are what you look like, end of story. At least, that's how most Latinos think. For us, a black woman can have white children and viceversa. Or you can be white and have black siblings. None of that one-drop rule that blacks in this country so fervently espouse. American blacks think that if you look white but your great-great grandmother came from Mozambique, you're black. Latinos believe that with time and intermarriage, families can "evolve" into whiteness--regardless of where their ancestors came from. "It's racism with an escape hatch!", exulted a black friend when I explained it to him. Another black friend views such notions of racial fluidity as insulting,heretical. She claims that on employment and government forms, the denomination "other" really means "other niggers". The issue is that in the US, determining race is not that simple. It is a process fraught with sociopolitical meaning, because assigned race is a form of currency that places top value on whiteness. So naturally, everyone wants to be white, and "established" whites become the arbiters of racial assignation. Whites decide who's white. It's a way of neutering competition from nonwhites trying to share in race-based social privilege. Race thus becomes a matter of perception: it depends on who you're talking to and what they think you are. Race in the US is also a matter of geography, where the racial goalposts keep moving according to where you're standing. For example, in Miami, (where my fellow Cubans adamantly insist on their whiteness) I' m definitely white, but in NYC, maybe not so much. So who's White in America? It's a matter of shifting opinions rooted in historical convenience. Greeks and Italians, for example, weren't considered white until late last century. Even so, their whiteness was assigned begrudgingly and given a separate status to appease WASPy sensitivities. Greeks and Italians became "ethnic" whites (a euphemism for "Inconclusively White", if you ask me). They stumbled upon that dubious distinction because at some point, whites decided to officially expand the notion of whiteness so they wouldn't be outnumbered by the surge of other races within the US. Of course, it's impossible to convey even half of all this during a 10-minute interview with a pollster. After all, these ideas are not my own, I adopted them because they make almost lyrical sense to me. They can be found in Critical Race Theory and in the book "Whiteness of a Different Color" by Matthew Frye Jacobson (Harvard Press). And though I swallowed that book whole, ideologically speaking, and though I do recommend it, I note it has been relegated to curiosity status by a literary establishment that likely prefers more familiar American notions of race and caste. But back to the survey: While I kept trying to dodge the issue of my own race, the pollster kept trying to wear me down, asking different versions of the same question: : "Well, so what are you?" I finally gave up and told him that I'm white--only because the survey didn't include any other options that might better accommodate reality. There was no "other" category, for example, and no "brown"--and "Hispanic", as we all should know, is not a race, but an ethnic denomination spanning people of many different colors who speak the same language and are culturally similar(NOT identical). And though I know that enlightening Americans (no pun intended) will take more than modifying sections on race within official paperwork, doing just that might be a good start towards expanding public consciousness about race over time.

In the Matrix

Too often,I think I live in a sort of matrix, enveloped by something alien that's trying to force-feed me its version of current events--while my common sense is telling me otherwise. In the United States, there are two big propaganda machines, each grinding out its own version of The Truth: the one promoted by rabid conservatives and the one favored by the Biden crowd. Their propaganda machines are the Mainstream Media, the pundits on TV, talk radio and the print outlets who widely disseminate views on either side. There's Fox on the extreme right, MSNBC (supposedly) on the left. There's the New York Post on the right and the New York Times on the left. And so on, down the line. Sane consumers reject rabid conservative Republican views, but find little comfort in modern Democratic attitudes. That's because both Republicans and Democrats are in the pockets of the rich. The Democrats in charge are really corporate conservatives, more interested in keeping their donors happy than in meeting the needs of the little people who voted them in. They'll say things that sound progressive, then do nothing to promote true liberal goals: affordable housing and education, decent laboral conditions, fair pricing, fair wages, reproductive choice, voting freedom, gun control and health care for all. Democrats in power say that they are "centrists", and that centrism is the only way to pacify Republicans and dissuade them from trying to destroy the Democratic Party. They claim "extreme" liberalism--or what's needed to right socioeconomic injustices in this country--will only frighten Republicans into further hostility. And so, their main struggle has been to foil progressives within the Democratic party, instead of battling the Republican thrust to take over this country. Except for senators Bernie Sanders (Vermont) and Elizabeth Warren (Massachussetts), the stars of the progressive movement are people of color, most notably, representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (New York), Ilhan Omar (Minnesota), Ayana Pressley (Massachussetts) and Rashida Tlalib (Michigan). These women, known as The Squad, have been effectively silenced by centrist Democratic heavyweights the likes of Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. So "Centrist" becomes just another word for "conservative", make no mistare. And when you hear the term "both sides", you are really listening to a camouflaged conservative argument because we all know that there's only one side, the side of truth and justice. And the truth is that there's no justice for average Americans struggling to survive on many fronts while the current Democratic leadership does nothing about it. There's no profit in it for our "leaders" ; it's been that way for decades, Clinton was Republican Lite, and Obama was all flash and no substance. And supposedly liberal mainstream media only parrots the corporate Democrat view, so forget THEM. If you want the truth unvarnished by politics, you have to resort to the independent YouTubers who freely voice their indignation at what's going on. And if you want solutions to the popular plight, don't look to Washington. Start building a liberal movement from the ground up. Start mobilizing to elect true liberals to state and local office. There's some indication it's already happening. In the recent primaries, true progressive candidates swept by corporate Democrats with much larger war chests. Of course, the mainstream media didn't mention it, but there are stirrings of a mass movement that's trying to break out of the informational matrix we've been dozing in for so long.Let's hope the trend continues.

US Latinas: Pro abortion, or no?

Depends on who you ask, I guess. The churro peddler in the subway might think differently from a staff interpreter at the United Nations; we're a varied bunch. They say that, as devout Catholics, most Latinas in the US reject abortion. They say that recent Latina immigrants oppose abortion more than do US-born Latinas. They say a lot of things. Yet, the numbers paint a clear picture: most US abortions are obtained by minority women. In Texas, Latinas are 74% of women getting abortions. The Guttmacher Institute, an abortion rights think tank, states that the abortion rate among US Latinas is double the rate among white women.

This is because Latinas are more likely to have unintended pregnancies. My own perspective on the subject of abortion is based on personal contacts. Most Latinas I know have a "don't ask, don't tell" attitude towards abortion. Latinas get abortions, they just don't talk about it-- and they don't believe in imposing their views on anyone else. Latinas seem to believe in choice. They also compartmentalize their beliefs: you can have an abortion one day; attend church the next. This is not hypocrisy; they just don't see these things as related. And abortion has been commonplace for generations. My mother had one just as we were getting ready to leave Cuba for the US. Our family faced an uncertain future in a new country;mom already had 3 children, a baby would've made things even worse. I myself had an abortion just after I'd moved to New York with my brand new bridegroom. We were struggling newlyweds in a strange city; we couldn't afford a baby. Mind you, this is not some angst-ridden confession; I have never endured a day's worth of guilt in my life. On the contrary, I was relieved that I'd dodged such a bullet. I've never felt that I'd "killed a baby"; to me, a cluster of cells with a faint heartbeat, unable to live outside the womb, is not a "baby". I did feel as though I'd been vacuumed clean from the inside out, and I didn't menstruate for two months, which was fine by me. Other than that,my abortion was uneventful, painless, and probably safer than actually giving birth years later. That was like being run over by a truck several times over 12 hours of labor that left me a weakened, bleeding mess with some of my innards pushed sideways. So it's not just liberal propaganda, it's actually true: a well -performed abortion is safer than vaginal birth or a c-section. Which brings us to the main reason for this blog: the current reality that the US Supreme Court has overturned its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, making it almost impossible to obtain legal abortion in about half of the United States. This will heavily affect poor minority women who can't afford to travel to states where abortion is legal. They will be forced to have unwanted babies or seek dangerous, back-alley abortions. But for white conservatives, what's the point of cancelling Roe? Do they really want to be inundated with unwanted brown babies? I think not. Currently making the rounds of fascism is the infamous "replacement" theory, where whites fear they'll be "replaced" by minorities due to their rapidly growing numbers.The unofficial immigration "policies" being enacted to counter these fears are as shocking as they are insidious. To begin with, US authorities have been waving in rosy-cheeked Ukrainians at the US/Mexico border while holding off the much darker-skinned Latinos. I guess whites are hoping to expand the nation's dwindling pool of white genes by welcoming unlimited numbers of Ukrainians. This is not new, other countries have tried it with varying degrees of success. The policy (obviously) failed in Cuba. But Argentina turned itself into a Caucasian nation by letting in only immigrants from Europe during the last century. In fact, Argentina used to have a small Black population which simply disappeared over time.To date,nobody knows where they went. I doubt, however, that they were forcibly sterilized into oblivion-- precisely what's happening to certain populations of US minorities. The forced sterilization of black and brown inmates (some men, but mostly women)in prisons and immigration detention centers is a common, but little known practice rooted in the eugenics movement. (Yes, we're talking about the US in this century. NOW. They'll try to tell you this infamous practice ended sonetime in the 1960's, but it still goes on). From 2006 to 2010, 148 female inmates were illegally sterilized at two California prisons)The practice disproportionately affects Latinos, Blacks and Native Americans, who are more likely than whites to be institutionalized. Typically, detainees who request minor medical treatment are sterilized during these routine procedures without their knowledge or consent. Those who protest risk deportation, solitary confinement,or any number of other punitive measures,depending on where they're being held. Lack of institutional oversight facilitates the abuse while cloaking it from public view. As with abortion rights, the US Supreme Court has been a major player in the sterilization drama. In 1927, the US Supreme Court ruled that "public welfare may require preventing unfit individuals from reproducing",in one of its most infamous rulings,Buck v. Bell. The Supreme Court has never expressly overturned Buck v. Bell. (In 1942, Skinner v. Oklahoma didn't specifically overturn Buck, it only ended "punitive" sterilization of felons, not sterilization of the "mentally ill"--and it required a "compelling state interest" and close scrutiny of each case, in forced sterilization. Big loopholes.)According to the National Women's Law Center, 31 states still allow forced sterilization! Maybe instead of overturning Roe v. Wade, which is, after all, about freedom of choice (and no doubt helps keep the number of black and brown babies in check without forcing anybody's hand)the Supreme Court should overturn Buck v. Bell. Stop forcibly sterilizing minority men and women and instead,let individals regulate their own reproducive choices.

When forbidden fruit turns sour

The latest crime that titillates New York City news media has unfolded like a cautionary tale for bored housewives or husbands who keep trophy mates.A Queens mother of two got herself killed by the Latino handyman with whom she'd been having an affair. After two years, she wanted to dump him and he'd have none of it. He started texting threats to her husband and kids. So she stuck a note on her fridge, casually reminding herself to "get a new handyman". A few days later she was dead. She argued with the handyman and he stabbed her to death. A charmed life cut short. She was a blonde beauty who at 51 looked 31, thanks no doubt to the ministrations of beauticians,dieticians, plastic surgeons, personal trainers, tennis pros and masseurs. She lived in a $2 million dollar home in an affluent suburb of Queens, courtesy of a rich and handsome husband whose Jewish last name she didn't take. Though the headlines lovingly mention her as a "Queens mom", she led a double life. She strove to maintain a respectable façade while also enjoying a Walk on the Wild Side, an exciting fling with an untamed brute. But this ended her life and brought public grief and shame to her loved ones. Did her husband know? At least suspect? Was he turning a blind eye on what he considered a casual fling? Maybe. After all, it was all happening under his nose. Is this like blaming the victim? Sure, though that doesn't make it any less true. She didn't deserve what happened to her--she did help bring it on. And what woman wouldn't want everything this one had and threw away with both hands? The killer was caught and he'll get his comeuppance, but that won't undo the tragedy he helped cause. He can be viewed as just scum who acted like scum because that's what scum does. At 44, he lived with his wife (yes, he was married,too) and two kids in a shack in a working class neighborhood of Queens.He did odd jobs for a living. Then he met this magic creature from a different world, got a taste of privilege, wanted more, and became obsessed with her. He was enraged when she eventually, inevitably tried to discard him. This was not some docile boy-toy, and ignoring that was her undoing. He erupted in all manner of dark passions fueled by jealousy, spite, and a wounded macho psyche she probably did not understand or count on, having no cultural point of reference for it.

Any Latina could have told her she was playing with fire. The headlines are full of Latinas killed by lovers or ex husbands in public housing or barrio street corners. In our culture, we know very well what spiteful men are capable of. She should've known better, but she unfortunately didn't.