lunes, 30 de mayo de 2016

Asesinato a distancia.


La música, las risas pasadas de copas, el humo del cigarrillo rozando mis ojos y una hermosa mujer bailando frente a mi. Se veía tímida y cabizbaja, su vestido llegaba por debajo de sus rodillas. Mi euforia y el entorno nos llevó a encontrarnos. las horas pasaban y continuamos bailando, pero algo me hacía sentir que ella era diferente. Después de escuchar reiteradas veces mi celular sonar, atiendo y era el aviso de que mi pedido había llegado. Sin preguntarle, acaricio su pelo, le beso la frente y la llevó a la salida.
Allí estaban mis hombres, de forma silenciosa sacan de sus bolsillos éxtasis, les pago y la miro a ella pero no dice nada. Comenzamos a caminar por la hermosa ciudad de Nueva York. Su forma de andar era débil y sus ojos enrojecidos me miraban. Hablamos cosas que jamas imagine hablar con nadie, su sonrisa reflejaba felicidad y encanto. En horas me había contado mitad de su vida, algunas cosas a medias, otras sin tanto detalle pero parte de su historia ahora era mía. Me habló de una casa media abandonada a las afueras de la ciudad, aquella casa que había heredado de sus abuelos. Particularmente la usaba para escribir y alejarse del ruido de la cuidad. Y así pasábamos las horas.. sabiendo más del otro, conociendo nuestros miedos y alegrías.

 Amaneció, estábamos en mi departamento pero ninguno de los dos pudimos recordar cómo fue que esto pasó. Pero no importó porque estábamos felices, sentíamos tranquilidad y confianza.
Desde el baño escucho
-Me llamo Sofia-
-Simón- le dije acomodándome la camisa
De repente escucho que la puerta de calle se cierra, no lograba entender qué había pasado. Salgo y ella ya no estaba. Rápidamente, calzo mis zapatos viejos y corro hasta alcanzarla.
-A donde crees que vas?- Le dije enojado
-Ya es hora de irme a trabajar- me respondió tímidamente
Mi cabeza empezó a imaginar muchas cosas,habrá visto aquellas fotos? esas diez fotos que delataban el gran pasado oscuro que me digne a dejar atrás? Mi mente no dejaba de atormentarme un segundo. Todo estaba saliendo tan bien, me estaba enamorando, ella no iba a ser una víctima. Le solté el brazo y corrí hacia mi departamento. Me dirigí hacia el baño, corrí aquel azulejo negro, aquel pedazo de cerámica que tapaba la tragedia de mi vida. Con el corazón en la boca y los ojos cerrados lo corri, y las fotos no estaban.Mis fotos ya no estaban y aquella nota que una vez escribí delatandome de mi propio crimen ya no estaba. Mi vida estaba en manos de aquella mujer, aquella mujer que conocí en un boliche. Aquella mujer con la que por un instante pensé que podría empezar de nuevo. Tenía que encontrarla, no podía dejar que todo se eche a perder, no iba a dejar que esa mujer termine con mi vida antes que yo con la suya.
Sentado en mi cama, con cierto nerviosismo, trate de hacer memoria, y recordar los secretos de la noche anterior en la que caminamos sin rumbo. Recordé aquel lugar que ella me contó que visitaba a menudo, aquella casita en las afueras de la ciudad. Era el lugar perfecto para hacerla desaparecer. Me dirigí hasta allí .

Ha pasado un año, pero aun no puedo creerlo. Aun sigo recordando a aquella mujer, como su sangre recorría mis manos, mis ojos lloraban y mi conciencia no entendía el porqué de aquel trágico acto. Como aquella mujer con la que por un instante me imaginaba todo hoy ya no esté. Y de vuelta me gano mi pasado, mi horrible y terrible pasado.
 Mi cabeza se golpeaba con las rejas y mis ojos veían el gran camino que me faltaba, 15 años de condena.

lunes, 9 de mayo de 2016

UNIT 1. Summary


Credibility Criteria.
critical thinking bring with it a number of techniques the ones can be used to assess the credibility of sources and the evidences they provide. Credibility Criteria is the name given to this techniques.

Neutrality.
It's shown that a neutral source is impartial, this one has no motive or reason to lie, to distort evidence, to present information wich supports only one side of an issue. An example of it could be the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service, this was introduced so as to resolve disputes in the workplace.

Vested Interest.
If an individual or an organisation has one if this one, they have something to gain from promoting and defending a particular point of view. This could be an opportunity to lie, that is to say, they distort evidences that are the real ones in order to benefit themselves.
For example, Tabacco companies are an excellent example of a vested interest. All of us know that smoking is destructive to health, while this companies lie about what was smoking, trying in a way to avoid the ``disadvantages´´ of it.
But not always the vested interests are presented in compannies, or even thought identifying one of them does not necessarily reduce the credibility of a source. In reallity, they may have a good reason in order to support their idea to say just the opposite. Another example could be if a person is accused of a crime they did not commit, it is in their interest to tell the thruth and to present precise evidences to support their innocence.

Bias.
This concept promotes in a way a better particular view, having predilection for something, or seeing things in a particular way. Racil prejudice, Propaganda, Support for football, Loyalties to relative friends are examples of BIAS.
People see Hitler as a reasonable source of evidence about Jewish because of his extreme prejudice against jews.
A fan of a football team club would give a far more luminous report of their team victory than a fan of their arch-rivals.
An eyewitness to a fight, the one involved a friend may do their best to take out blame from their friend when giving evidences to the police.
Even though people could have a particular bia
s, this does not mean that the ones will influence in the situation.

EXPERTISE.
The testimony given by an expert are often higly credible. For example if we have a civil engineer, a forensic scientist, a geneticist, a criminologist, a meteorologist, an architect or a hospital consultant. Their training, their knowledge skills and their fantastic experience make them trusty sources to the evidence they provide.
However, sometimes are reasons to distrust their credibility. First of all, experts could also confuse. Buildings specially fall down becauseof a defect in the architects design. Doctors dont always make the correct diagnostic of a persons illness.

Reputation.
It makes reference to a person's character or a organization standing. In general the higher the reputation of a source is, the more credible it is seen to be.
However a reputation for honestly mean that the source provides accurate.

Observation and eyewitnes accounts.
The eyewitness discurse are usually seen more credible That the second hand or hearsay evidence. An eyewitness directly observes an event or an accident etc. During the re-telling of that event, details and important information sometimes are changed, left asside or even though sometimes people add false information in order to support their evidence. As a conclusion, hearday evidence is seen as less credible as the ones of first-hand or eyewitness speeches.

Corroboration.
This ones are pieces of evidences wich support each other. Corroboration inereases the credibility of the evidence.

Selectivility and Representatives.
What type of evidence id selected? Does it represent all sifes of an issue or only one side?
Campaings are groups of friends like greenpeace. The select only evidence wich support their views. This one-sided selection of evidence is seem to reduce their credibility as sources. It reflects their BIAS. The presentations of unrepresentative information can weaken the credibility of the source and the evidence they provide.

Context.
The context made reference to the setting in wich the evidence is produced. When assesing the credibility of evidence it is important to look at the wider context in order to indentify factors wich might affect the evidence wich people provide.

Credibility on truth.
Credible means something that is believable. It is not true. The word true means something that is real, a fact that it happens, that is to sat that this word means something that is correct. Credibility does not equ truth that credible evidence is not necessarily true evidence. So finally the evidence does not have to be true in order to be credible.










Seguidores