Nentoi, Kenneth W. (1997).

"Peacemaking anu Ciiminal }ustice: A Bumanistic Appioach to

Ciiminal }ustice Euucation." 0iiginally publisheu in !"# %&'()*+, -./*.0.12 3#+.&4/# 5..6, N.
Schwaitz anu W. Nillei, eus. Washington B.C.: The Ameiican Sociological Association.

!"#$"%#&'() #(+ ,-'%'(#. /012'$"3 4 50%#('12'$ 466-7#$8 27 9"#$8'() ,-'%'(#. /012'$"

The title of this papei iefeis to both "humanism" anu "peacemaking." Bumanism has been
uefineu in a vaiiety of ways (Bohm, 1989; Abbaganano, 197S; Lee, 197S), while peacemaking
is closely ielateu to Pepinsky's notion of a nonviolent ciiminology that "seeks to enu suffeiing
anu theieby eliminate ciime" (1991:4). Ny iueas fit into these geneial aieas, yet the fit may
not be peifect. This papei uesciibes a teaching methou that attempts to humanize offenueis
as well as victims. As we know, it is easy to encouiage stuuents to humanize victims. It can be
veiy challenging to encouiage stuuents to make an effoit to unueistanu, anu caie about, a
seiial killei.

:#+ ;0<1 4-" !"76." 977

Ny opinion, anu the basis foi many of the iueas piesenteu in this papei, is that "bau guys" aie
humans too. Baviu Biuck, in Becisions of Beath, quotes Tocqueville in suggesting that
iestiaint in punishment "extenus as fai as oui sense of social equality, anu no fuithei: the
same man who is full of humanity towaiu his fellow cieatuies when they aie at the same time
his equals becomes insensible to theii affliction as soon as that equality ceases'" (1991:S2S).
The uemonization of those who commit muiuei is just one example of an effoit to place a
baiiiei between "us" anu "them." This aitificial baiiiei pievents us fiom iecognizing anuoi
accepting a vaiiety of potentially effective ciime contiol policies. Ciiminologists, thiough the
teaching of ciiminology anu ciiminal justice, have contiibuteu to the "us" veisus "them"
mentality. Nills (194S) waineu that uue to maiket foices, "textbooks tenu to embouy a
content agieeu upon by the acauemic gioup using them" (194S:16S). Seveial yeais latei,
Liazos echoeu similai sentiments. In a ieview of populai ueviance textbooks, Liazos pointeu
out that iueological biases in the fielu of ueviance weie "appaient as much fiom what these
books leave unsaiu anu unexamineu, as fiom what they say" (1972:1u4).

This papei uiscusses an ongoing effoit to move the teaching of ciiminology away fiom the
"us" veises "them" mentality. This effoit is motivateu by fiustiation as well as hope. The
fiustiation is ielateu to a feeling that politicians continue to iepeat the same policy eiiois.
Nany of the flaweu policies, foi example, thiee stiikes laws anu the incieuible inciease in
incaiceiation, seem to be uiiectly ielateu to the "us" veisus "them" mentality. This mentality
shoulu be challengeu by those who teach in the aieas of ueviance, ciiminology, ciiminal
justice, anu law. The acauemic community enuoises ineffective policy by failing to point out
the eiiois of, as well as the motives behinu, these policies. The hope that motivates the effoit
to humanize ciiminology is baseu on a belief (peihaps naive) that thiough oui effoits to
euucate futuie policy makeis, we may begin to see positive changes in the ciiminal justice
system. The teaching stiategies uiscusseu in this papei aie intenueu to challenge steieotypes.
Bumanist ciiminology can succeeu to the uegiee that we aie able to weaken the uominant
paiauigm, which is typifieu by state uiiecteu violence, foice, anu coeicion. The paiauigm is
challengeu each time a glimmei of humanity appeais in an aiea we have been tolu consists of
people who uo not ueseive to be tieateu with iespect.

The classioom offeis many oppoitunities to challenge the belief that state uiiecteu violence is
only useu against "them." In the 1988 Piesiuential election, Nichael Bukakis was askeu
whethei he woulu suppoit the ueath penalty if his wife weie muiueieu. Images of Willie
Boiton, who committeu muiuei aftei being ieleaseu unuei an eaily paiole law signeu by
uoveinoi Bukakis, immeuiately spiang to the minus of many Ameiicans. Ny anti-ueath
penalty stance seems to motivate stuuents to pose the same question to me. The questionei
geneially uses my wife oi chiluien as the hypothetical muiuei victim. The fact that I am not
iunning foi Piesiuent makes it ielatively easy foi me to answei that "no, I woulu not want the
ueath penalty if my wife oi chiluien muiueieu someone." As we know, the socially uefineu
"victims" aie not the only humans involveu. Bowevei, many seem to foiget that the
"muiueiei" is also a human, most likely with close connections to othei humans. We shoulu
not wonuei why oui stuuents pose such questions. They, like many otheis in society, have a
limiteu view of the potential foi change within the ciiminal justice system. Those of us who
choose to challenge the uominant paiauigm can uo so without imposing alteinative
iueologies. The goal is not to biainwash stuuents. The goal is to bieak uown baiiieis that
impeue the effoit to ciitically anu honestly examine veiy complex issues.

Befoie moving foiwaiu, it is impoitant to emphasize that many lives have been shatteieu by
ciime. Bowevei, oui effoits too often focus on the "victims" of ciime. This papei pioceeus
with the iuea that it is not necessaiily helpful to paiticipate in an enteipiise that tuins victims,
by uefault, into fine examples of humanity, while offenueis aie uemonizeu. Cleaily, some
people who commit ciimes aie uangeious, violent, anu act with no iespect foi otheis. As
unpopulai as this may sounu, the actions of these ciiminals, as heinous as they can be, uo not
allow us to uefine them as uevils.

4 50%#('12 ,-'%'(7.7)< ,70-1"

The following uiscussion centeis on stiategies that encouiage alteinative ways of thinking
about "ciiminals." Nany of these stiategies meet with iesistance. As Quinney points out,
stuuents boin aftei the late 196us "come to us entiencheu in a conseivative iueology of ciime.
. . . To auvance an alteinative, a non-violent anu humane appioach to ciime, is met with
consiueiable uismay anu iesistance" (199S: 4S8). In light of this pieuictable iesistance, it
may be best to begin the humanizing effoit at the moie benign enu of the spectium of ueviant
behavioi. 0nce stuuents begin to accept that the ueviance cieating machineiy is extiemely
effective, anu woiks equally well thioughout the full iange of "ueviant" anu "ciiminal"
behaviois, they have taken the fiist step towaiu humanizing all actois in the ciiminal justice
system.

=> ?"@"- 9870)82 > A#1 # B"@'#(2=

Liazos (1978) waineu of sociology's fascination with "Nuts, Sluts, anu Pieveits." In contiast, a
humanistic ciiminology couise piesents an oppoitunity to exeicise a gieat ueal of cieativity in
the selection of ieauings. 0ne of my goals has been to select topics that illustiate the
machineiy that cieates "ueviants." A seconu goal is to illustiate that this machineiy is so
effective that "noimal" people, people veiy similai to oui stuuents, can be efficiently uefineu
as ueviants.

0ne ieauing, which uoes not appeai in tiauitional ueviant behavioi texts, is a shoit stoiy by
Kuit vonnegut. Baiiison Beigeion (vonnegut, 1961) is a stoiy about a society in which
eveiyone is equal. In vonnegut's fictional society, the state attempts to limit non noimative
behavioi oi tiaits by cieating "equality" thiough the use of "hanuicapping uevices" such as
leau weights, face masks, anu louu noises intenueu to minimize logical thought. Baiiison
Beigeion is a gieat intiouuction to the powei to uefine ceitain behavioi oi tiaits as
unacceptable. The powei to uefine, when coupleu with the powei to sanction, is veiy
intimiuating. Stuuents aie encouiageu to look foi examples, in touay's society, wheie the
state has the powei to uefine anu sanction ceitain behaviois. Theii examples often incluue
situations wheie "noimal" people, often thiough no fault of theii own, aie uefineu as ueviant.

Anothei ieauing uesciibes an example of subcultuial "ueviance" that has been uefineu within
oui cultuie. Peaison (1987) wiites about the uiateful Beau phenomenon. While many
stuuents iuentify with this paiticulai foim of behavioi, otheis will see the behavioi of
Beauheaus as quite ueviant. Again, how can something some uefine as "noimal" behavioi is
uefineu as "ueviant" by so many otheis. Stuuents enjoy this topic anu aie often suipiiseu to
finu that some in oui society have veiy negative feelings about Beauheaus.

Buff anu Bong (1989) uiscuss the cieation anu application of uefinitions of ueviance in
ielation to women bouybuilueis. Beckei (19SS) uesciibes a faiily benign piocess thiough
which "noimal" people become maiijuana useis. Tioyei anu Naikle (1984) uesciibe the
emeiging social pioblem of coffee uiinking. Petiunik anu Sheaiing (1996) uesciibe the
piactices engageu in to lessen the impact of negative views of stutteiing. Each of these
ieauings pioviues a veiy humanistic view of ueviance. Again, each has been well ieceiveu by
my stuuents.

If ueviance anu ciime aie seen as similai behavioi, leauing to uiffeient social sanctions,
stuuents aie able to see that a majoi uiffeience between ueviance anu ciime is the uegiee to
which society blames the actoi foi his oi hei "unacceptable" behavioi. Stuuents begin a move
towaiu a humanist ciiminology once they begin to iecognize the mechanisms active in
assigning blame. These mechanisms eventually move to sepaiate "us" fiom "them." At this
point, the humanity of each actoi is compiomiseu.

=/0@"('." B".'(C0"(21= 4-" 50%#( 977

Nany of the most humanizing wiitings in ueviant behavioi aie the iesult of qualitative
ieseaich. Foi example, uolustein (199u) inteivieweu "uelinquent" juveniles. uolustein
suggests that the expeiience of being "uelinquent" conveys expeitise in unueistanuing
uelinquency. uolustein's effoits to pioviue "oiuinaiy knowleuge as a supplement to anu, at
times, even a ieplacement foi piofessional scientific knowleuge" (emphasis in oiiginal,
199u:S) pioviue a cleai anu compassionate pictuie of the woilu of juveniles.

Elliott Cuiiie (1992), in Bope anu Tiouble, follows a similai path. Be wiites that he hau
leaineu a gieat ueal thiough peisonal inteiviews anu that otheis neeueu to heai the stoiies, in
theii entiiety, as tolu by the subjects of his ieseaich. Cuiiie felt "that it was only by heaiing
theii own stoiies that we coulu appieciate the complexity anu uniqueness of each of theii
lives" (1992:xii). This appioach was necessaiy, accoiuing to Cuiiie, because steieotypes
"misleau us anu hobble a iational appioach to the pioblems of tioubleu kius. They obscuie
the complexity of the foices that influence the paths young people take" (1992:xii).

Cuiiie, uolustein, anu otheis have engageu in ethnogiaphic ieseaich that allows us to uevelop
a much ueepei sense of empathy foi those who aie uefineu as ueviant, uelinquent, oi ciiminal.
This type of ieseaich is a iich iesouice foi anyone attempting to humanize the ciiminal justice
piocess. Aftei ieauing such peisonal stoiies, only the most obstinate stuuents will fail to
iecognize that those who attiact the attention of the ciiminal justice system aie not so
uiffeient fiom themselves.

A less thoioughly ieseaicheu aiea, anu thankfully one that geneially uoes not incluue juvenile
offenueis, is the phenomenon uefineu as "seiial killing." In the following section we tuin oui
attention to the task of humanizing some of the "least human" paiticipants in oui society.

>(@'2" # D'.."- 27 B'(("-E

As might be imagineu, this gioup can be extiemely uifficult to humanize. 0ne methou that has
been somewhat effective, anu veiy populai with stuuents, has been to view seiial killeis oi
othei mass muiueieis as they have been uepicteu in film. 0ne of the most populai films,
although I uo not show it without numeious uisclaimeis anu the cleaily elaboiateu
oppoitunity to miss class without feai of ietiibution, is Natuial Boin Killeis.

The film's main chaiacteis, Nickey anu Nalloiy, aie not likely to be inviteu to my house foi
uinnei. Bowevei, the film uoes uepict a couple with ieal, although unusual, pioblems. The
film pushes the viewei to wonuei how these inuiviuuals coulu have been cieateu. The impact
of violent meuia messages, chilu abuse, euucation, anu othei socialization events aie outlineu
in the film. Stuuents uo not believe, in spite of the film's title, that Nickey anu Nalloiy weie
boin to live a muiueious lifestyle. Some stuuents aie cleaily uncomfoitable with the
iomanticization of the chaiacteis in Natuial Boin Killeis. I believe this is a valiu concein, yet
the film iemains a helpful tool in an effoit to bieak uown steieotypes in a way that may leau
to compassion foi those who aie caught in a life of ciime.

Anothei film, a well-uone uocumentaiy, piesents the human siue of a female seiial killei.
Aileen Wuoinos: The Selling of a Seiial Killei, intiouuces us to a woman who has killeu at least
seven men. Bei stoiy has also been tolu, in a somewhat less enlighteneu mannei, in a
televiseu movie. A populai intiouuctoiy ciiminal justice text also uiscusses Aileen Wuoinos.
Schmallegei uesciibes Aileen as a colu heaiteu killei, while uesciibing hei fiist victim as a
"woulu-be Samaiitan" who was "shot, stiippeu of his clothing, anu uumpeu on a ioausiue,
while Aileen anu a female companion allegeuly uiove off in his cai" (199S:61). 0ne can only
wonuei how the woiu "allegeuly" appeaieu in Schmallegei's uesciiption. The teim seems to
inuicate that theie coulu be some uoubt iegaiuing the situation. Yet when useu in a context in
which guilt is not questioneu, the teim seems to be an insinceie attempt to consiuei
alteinative uesciiptions of the events. A ieal attempt to be open to alteinatives might have
mentioneu Aileen's uefense. The uemonization machineiy, active within ciiminal justice
euucation, as well as thioughout society, is haiu at woik.

In the uocumentaiy, Ns. Wuoinos is piesenteu as a victim of an uncaiing ciiminal justice
system. She is iepiesenteu by a gieeuy anu incompetent attoiney who woulu cleaily piefei to
be a iock stai. Aileen's "mothei" uemonstiates hei love foi hei newly auopteu uaughtei by
encouiaging hei to pleau no contest to multiple muiuei. The logic behinu this plea, which is
suppoiteu by the attoiney, is that this plea, anu the iesulting ueath penalty, will acceleiate the
piocess thiough which Aileen will ieceive uou's ultimate foigiveness. 0thei playeis incluue
police officeis who ignoie eviuence that woulu ieuuce the value of a stoiy they weie
attempting to sell to the netwoiks. The uocumentaiy also incluues an inteiview with Ns.
Wuoinos. The inteiview happeneu only aftei the film's piouucei paiu a significant sum of
money to Aileen's attoiney anu auoptive mothei.

Ns. Wuoinos, an aumitteu piostitute who claims that she killeu these men because they weie
about to iape anu kill hei, is a victim as well as offenuei. Stuuents aie shockeu to leain about
hei situation anu question whethei it is a tiue stoiy. Again, like the fictional chaiacteis in
Natuial Boin Killeis, she may not be a canuiuate foi uinnei at home with the family. Bowevei,
the uocumentaiy shows the humanity of an inuiviuual who has been victimizeu thioughout
much of hei life.

=:02 F7%" 7G 98"% B"1"-@" 27 B'"=

The case of Aileen Wuoinos is an obvious link to the issue of capital punishment. Since neaily
all ueath penalty wiitings, at least those that spiing fiom the scholaily community, aie in
opposition to the ueath penalty, each may be helpful in a humanist ciiminal justice couise.
These wiitings may offei moial oi ieligious aiguments in opposition to the ueath penalty.
0theis aigue against the iuea of geneial ueteiience (Aichei et al., 198S). Baluus et al. (1986)
uocument the uisciiminatoiy application of the ueath penalty. Anothei viewpoint, which
avoius the pioblem associateu with humanizing muiueieis, is that a numbei of innocent
humans have been executeu (Beuau anu Rauelet, 1987).

Anothei stiategy, which has been faiily successful in my teaching, incluues ueath iow stoiies.
Books by Bicks (199S) anu Rauelet (1989) incluue a collection of stoiies fiom people on ueath
iow. The naiiatives aie offeieu by the conuemneu, those who woik on ueath iow, the
families of both victim anu offenuei, anu fiom a vaiiety of obseiveis. Again, the woius of
those involveu in the system pioviue compassionate eviuence in suppoit of a humanist
ciiminology. Seveial stuuents who have ieau Rauelet's book have iepoiteu that theii opinion
on the ueath penalty hau changeu. Some of these stuuents claimeu to make the shift fiom
stiongly auvocating, to stiongly opposing, the ueath penalty. Attituue change of this
magnituue was not my goal. While some acauemics woulu not question the appiopiiateness
of oveit attempts to change attituues in ielation to the ueath penalty, I am less comfoitable
with such tactics. Peihaps the humanist ciiminologist can be satisfieu by effoits to pioviue
infoimation leauing to enlighteneu attituue foimation anuoi aujustment. Theie is no uoubt
that the stiategies piesenteu in this papei aie intenueu to geneiate change among ciiminal
justice stuuents. Ny bet is that this change will be in a ceitain uiiection. This change can
occui in a vaiiety of ways, eithei suuuen, oi peihaps veiy slowly, as a iesult of a caieful
evolution of iueas.

,7($.01'7(

0ne of my most effective attempts to humanize ueviance anu ciiminology involveu a campus
anu classioom visit fiom a homeless man who hau been an active membei of the Bell's Angels.
Be was an "enfoicei," hau taken seveial lives, anu hau seiveu time in piison. At the time of his
visit, he was no longei an active membei of the Bell's Angels. This man suffeieu fiom a
genetic uisoiuei that hau foiceu him to unueigo ovei Suu suigeiies. Be was not physically
attiactive in tiauitional teims. Be was the type of peison that most Ameiicans woulu avoiu if
passeu on a siuewalk. Be was fiom a pooi family, in uiiect contiast to the stuuents at the
exclusive libeial aits college he was visiting.

I was ieluctant to issue an invitation when the oppoitunity piesenteu itself. I felt that his visit
might be little moie than a "fieak show." I was conceineu that my stuuents, who woulu see
this inuiviuual as veiy uiffeient fiom them, woulu move to the "us" veisus "them" moue of
thinking. Foitunately, I unueiestimateu these stuuents. They weie absolutely spellbounu.
They wanteu to leain all they coulu fiom this man. They tieateu him with uignity anu
honoieu him with theii sinceie effoits to unueistanu his life. A one-uay visit fiom this man,
much moie like "them" than "us," taught ovei 1uu inuiviuuals that the lives of "us" anu "them"
aie intiicately inteitwineu.

Peihaps this is the iight time to humanize ciiminology. Immaiigeon wiites that "theie aie
numeious ciacks in the aimoi" that piotects a ciiminal justice policy that ielies heavily on
iepiessive measuies (1991:429). Be aigues that an "opening theiefoie exists to challenge
anu oiganize against the pievailing paiauigm of justice" (1991:429). Ciiminology has "too
often seiveu the violence of ciiminal justice" (Quinney, 199S:8). Change is unlikely unless we,
as ciiminologists, begin to challenge the uominant paiauigm. This challenge neeu not involve
majoi policy statements oi giounubieaking ieseaich. The tools to move towaiu a humanist
ciiminology aie cuiiently available. These tools can be useu to encouiage futuie policy
makeis to iesist piessuies to uemonize offenueis. Instilling this iesistance may be the best
hope foi cieating a humanist, compassionate, peaceful, system of ciiminal justice.

H"G"-"($"1

Abbagnano, N. (197S). "Renaissance humanism." In P.P. Weinei, eu. 7*/,*.)(42 .8 ,"# "*+,.42
.8 *9#(+: -,&9*#+ .8 +#0#/,#9 ;*<.,(0 *9#(+= New Yoik: Sciibneis.

Aichei, B., uaitnei, R., anu Beittel, N. (198S). "Bomiciue anu the ueath penalty: A cioss-
national test of a ueteiience hypothesis." >.&4)(0 .8 ?4*'*)(0 @(A B ?4*'*).0.12, 74, 991.

Baluus, B., Pulaski, C., anu Woouwoith, u. (1986). "Aibitiaiiness anu uisciimination in the
auministiation of the ueath penalty: A challenge to state supieme couits." -,#,+.) @(A
3#<*#A, 1S, 1SS-261.

Beckei, B.S. (19SS). "Becoming a successful maiihuana usei." !"# C'#4*/() >.&4)(0 .8
-./*.0.12, S9, 2SS-242.

Beuau, B.A. anu Rauelet, N.L. (1987). "Niscaiiiages of justice in potential capital cases."
-,()8.49 @(A 3#<*#A, 4u, 21-179.

Bohm, R.N. (1989). "Bumanism anu the ueath penalty, with special emphasis on the post-
Fuiman uecision=D >&+,*/# E&(4,#402, 6(2) 17S-19S.

Bohm, R.N. anu vogel, R.E. (1991). "Euucational expeiiences anu ueath penalty opinions:
Stimuli that piouuce changes." >.&4)(0 .8 ?4*'*)(0 >&+,*/# F9&/(,*.), 2(1) 69-8u.

Biuck, B. (1991). "Becisions of ueath." In }.B. Skolnick anu E. Cuiiie (eus.) ?4*+*+ *) C'#4*/()
*)+,*,&,*.)+G #*1"," #9*,*.). New Yoik: Baipei Collins.

Cuiiie, E. (1992). 7.;# ()9 ,4.&H0#= New Yoik: Pantheon Books.

Bicks, S. (eu.). (199S). I.&)1 H0..9: >&<#)*0# J&+,*/# ()9 ,"# 9#(," ;#)(0,2= Amheist, NY:
Piometheus Books.

Buff, R.W. anu Bong, L.K. (1989). "Nanagement of ueviant iuentity among competitive women
Bouybuilueis. " In B.B. Kelly, (eu.) 7#<*(), 5#"(<*.4. New Yoik: St. Naitin's Piess.

uolustein, A. (199u). 7#0*)K&#),+ .) 7#0*)K&#)/2= Champaign, IL: Reseaich Piess.

Immaiigeon, R. (1991). "Beyonu the feai of ciime." In B.E. Pepinsky anu R. Quinney, (eus.)
?4*'*).0.12 (+ ;#(/#'(6*)1= Bloomington, IN: Inuiana 0niveisity Piess.

Lee, A.N. (197S). !.A(49 "&'()*+, +./*.0.12= Englewoou Cliffs: Pientice Ball.

Liazos, A. (1978). "The poveity of the sociology of ueviance: Nuts, sluts, anu pieveits." -./*(0
L4.H0#'+G 2u, 1uS-12u.

Nills, C.W. (194S). "The piofessional iueology of social pathologists." !"# C'#4*/() >.&4)(0 .8
-./*.0.12G 49, 16S-18u.

Peaison, A. (1987). "The giateful ueau phenomenon: An ethnomethouological appioach."
I.&," B -./*#,2G 18(4), 418-4S2.

Pepinsky, B.E. (1991). "Peacemaking in ciiminology anu ciiminal justice." In B.E. Pepinski
anu R. Quinney, (eus.) ?4*'*).0.12 (+ L#(/#'(6*)1. Bloomington, IN: Inuiana 0niveisity
Piess.

Pepinsky, B.E. anu Quinney, R. (eus.) (1991). ?4*'*).0.12 (+ L#(/#'(6*)1= Bloomington, IN:
Inuiana 0niveisity Piess.

Petiunik, N. anu Sheaiing, C.B. (1996). "Stutteieis' piactices." In E. Rubington anu N.S.
Weinbeig, (eus.) 7#<*()/#: !"# M),#4(/,*.)*+, L#4+;#/,*<#, sixth euition, Boston: Allyn anu
Bacon.

Quinney, R. (199S). "A life of ciime: Ciiminology anu public policy as peacemaking." >.&4)(0
.8 ?4*'# ()9 >&+,*/#, 16(2), S-9.

Rauelet, N. (eu.). (1989). !"# 7#(," L#)(0,2: F++(2+ .) ( ?4&#0 ()9 N)&+&(0 L&)*+"'#),=
Philauelphia: Temple 0niveisity Piess.

Schmallegei, F. (199S). ?4*'*)(0 >&+,*/# !.9(2: C) M),4.9&/,.42 ,#O, 8.4 ,"# !A#),2P8*4+,
?#),&42= Englewoou Cliffs: Pientice Ball.

Tioyei, R.}. anu Naikle, u.E. (1984). "Coffee uiinking: An emeiging social pioblem." -./*(0
L4.H0#'+, S1(4).

vonnegut, K. (1961). "Baiiison Beigeion." Repiinteu in K. vonnegut, Q#0/.'# ,. ,"# R.)6#2
%.&+# (1988). New Yoik: Lauiel.