Archive July 2011
According to the BBC, a bottle of 1811 Chateau
d’Yquem was bought for 75,000 pounds sterling by French collector Christian
Vanneque. Depending on your point of view that kind of expenditure is either
highly disturbing or makes you secretly envious, wishing you had that kind of
A few years ago, the
a story about the average worldwide income which was pegged at $7,000 a year. It
would take the average worker 17.6 years if he or she saved every last cent to
buy that bottle.
This isn’t a rant against
the rich and how they spend their money. It is an essay about how deep desire
for status, recognition and approval. And how these desires are partly
responsible for the economic reality of our time—1% of Americans own 40% of the
wealth and 20% of the income. It also an essay about the efforts people go about
in using money to gain status and recognition in the global community. Pay that
kind of money for a bottle of wine and people around the world will read about
you, they will know your name, the name of your restaurant. As a marketing ploy,
it is quite brilliant. That bottle of wine also highlights how all that wealth
which is supposed to go into creating new jobs, is just as likely to find new
and novel ways to display status.
Criminals are a diverse
lot with manifest motives and intentions. The criminal class includes the eleven
year old who steals a loaf of bread because he’s hungry. Hunger doesn’t exclude
him from being a criminal. In the 18th century, he might be
transported to Australia. We tend to have sympathy for criminals driven by
The man driving his mother
whose has had a stroke at high speed to a hospital, runs red lights, hits a
couple of parked cars, but manages to get her to the hospital before she dies is
also a law-breaker but we have a different feeling about the ‘culpability’ issue
than say a teenager who gets drunk and does all the same things as the man going
to the hospital. Yet we have no problem thinking the teenager should be punished
and taught a lesson.
Necessity drives certain
impulses that lead to criminal behavior. In an emotional rage, someone gets out
of their car and stabs another motorist to death. Or someone kills their spouse,
neighbor, friend over a remark, insult, or slight. That is, someone has
questioned their ‘status’ and that activity is always dangerous. In a face
culture like Thailand, where status is of paramount importance, slights to
status invite retaliation.
We want status. Perhaps it
is a need like food, water, shelter and sex. Status motives people. Give them a
ribbon, decoration, trophy, or gold star and they will fight and die for you.
Competition for status makes short cuts tempting. And short cuts are the
slippery slope to criminal activity. When thinking what drives someone to commit
a crime, examine the underlying impulse that was the motive for crime. Was the
conduct done because the criminal is starving or his mother is dying, or will
the result of the crime evaluate his or her status?
I steal a loaf of bread
because I am hungry isn’t the same as I steal a Rolex not because I want to tell
the time but because I want to impress my friends. Or I invite a government
official to dinner and pop open a bottle of wine that cost 75,000 pounds
sterling before asking them to grant me a telecom, mining, or shipping
Criminal law fences off
status acquiring activity as well as actions to acquire goods owned by others
without paying for them. Prisons are filled with criminals who failed in their
quest to gain status through illegal means. And they bunk with those whose
illegally acquired goods, also mainly to achieve status, failed.
The large crimes needed to
pull off big time; international status takes us into the realm of banking,
finance and journalism. If you can elevate your status sufficiently high, you
can influence the police, courts and government that your activity is socially
useful and not criminal. You can support changes to laws and regulations that
would block your ambitions to increase your status even more. Hedge fund
managers, CEOs, bankers have leveraged their status by organizing politically
and reducing any attempts to control their behavior or to tax their
Of course, these status
seekers know that others are unhappy with the lopsided way that status is
assigned to them. They also know that by cooking the books, they can stay
‘legal’ while the vast majority of the population struggle for the scraps of
status and may find their activity ‘criminalized’. The protected class, which
has most of the status horde, is quite happy to imprison the status seekers
below. It teaches them a lesson about life. Status seeking as a goal is limited
to a tiny number of winners. Once they enter the winner’s circle, they are
content to lock the door.
Criminal law is what we
use to control the losers in the status race. The winners pay governments to
write that laws to constrain the activities of the also-rans. The fundamental
problem, as the current budget crisis in the United States suggests, is that
unless governments control status seekers in the top 1% of the population, that
class will own them, control them, and ensure that the prisons are filled by
those who fail to play by the rules as defined by them.
We want our star football
players, singers, actors and Nobel Prize winners. The problem are these winners
are used as a beard by those with predator business talents that enrich without
corresponding benefits to the larger community. Hedge fund managers, finance
moguls and CEOs of the Fortune 500 companies (who make up the bulk of the .01%)
of top income earners aren’t rock stars nor are they coming up with a cure for
cancer. But they have the skill to skate close to the boundaries of the laws,
rules and regulations that govern their activities, sometimes skating over the
line; and if they can, fund a politician to extend the line.
This group redefines what
is a crime in order to better pursue their personal interest.
outside of government achieve status above those elected to government, and
those in government owe their position to the wealthiest citizens, the laws no
longer reflect the majority of citizens. And the majority of citizens no longer
understand that their view and opinions have been shaped and distributed by
those who wish to use them for their own ends.
Redistribution of wealth
is one way to combat status hoarding. But redistribution is a loaded, nasty
taboo word. So let’s think of this concentration of wealth like the pollution
that poisons the atmosphere and contributes to climate change; let’s not
redistribute wealth or income. Let’s talk about “cap”. This is something we are
familiar with. There’s a cap on the speed limit. You can’t go as fast as you
want. There’s a cap on the chemical and toxics you can dump into rivers, lakes,
canals and the ocean. There are caps on carbon emissions. The one common feature
that caps have: is they don’t redistribute speed, chemicals or carbon, but they
do place a limit on making a profit from driving at high speeds (truck drivers)
or from polluting the air, rivers, forests and oceans. We have no problem saying
the community-interest overrides the self-interest. Society already agrees to
criminalize certain selfish behavior committed by individuals even though it may
deprive them of more income or wealth.
Why not put a ‘cap’ on
income and wealth? And for the same basic reason, that a concentration of a
large percentage of the wealth in the upper one percent is detrimental to the
rest of the community and damages them. Anyone who doesn’t believe that such
damage doesn’t spread across a large range of other people’s interest haven’t
been watching the James and Rupert Murdock show on the BBC. Or have already
forgot about the financial crash of 2008. Say cap income at the current rates
the rich pay on the first $12 million dollars a year. Most people could scrap
past on a million a month. Then start progressive taxing the additional income
until it hits $24 million a year and then let the tax be 90%. On wealth, the
first $250 million, old rules apply, after that it goes back to the community.
Even if the community doesn’t need it; the money should go back. There is a good
policy reason: income and wealth concentrations at the current levels in the
United States threat the fabric of representative democracy, and the policing
and judicial system.
If we are honest, the
arguments for unlimited wealth and income concentration are about keeping people
moving ahead with incentives. The reality is what moves people to continue to
excel and push the boundaries is they want recognition. More than want it; they
crave recognition and to show a higher status. Our problem is “globalization is
big money” has become universal status measuring stick. The consensus we once
had that allowed for share meaning and structure has fractured into cult-like
enclaves where debate, reason and dialogue no longer are welcome.
The Forbes list of the
richest people is translated, read, studied and talked about in every language
on the planet. If we could find new status measuring sticks then money would
matter less. Those who hunger for our community (and more importantly their
peer’s) recognition can have airports, squares, and parks named after them; give
them awards, medals, citations, knighthoods, and gold bars to wear on their
lapels. Revise the Forbes annual list to include the number of gold stars, red
ribbons, or public declarations by MPs as to their worthy
We are at a crossroads
politically, socially and economically in finding the political will to win this
battle. Unless we dismantle the unregulated status consolidation at the top, the
democratic system will collapse into warring cults and when that happens the
scramble to maintain order will overwhelm even the best of legal systems. Let
people strive for status. But let it be known that there are limits as to how
much status any society can reasonably allow to fall into a few
And let’s recognize that
without caps on pollution and income the whole ecosystem is threatened. The
rebalancing of community interest with self-interest has never been easy; and it
is a kind of work that never is finished. All we can say looking around us is
that self-interested income generation and wealth is no longer remotely in
equilibrium with the larger community interest.
As for those who open that
bottle 1811 Chateau d’Yquem and pass it around, they might want to think about
how far we’ve come in the last 200 years. And ask themselves who will be buying
a bottle of 2011 Chateau d’Yquem in 2211. And at what price and what will their
world look like?
Give some thought to that
nice gold star. Say one star for every $15 million in tax paid. Wouldn’t that
invite envy from friends and colleagues, the attention of beautiful women, the
admiration of civil society? I know what you are thinking. I can get one of
those gold stars for a 100 baht on Khao San Road. Maybe. But it will still be
difficult to pull off the counterfeit billionaire trick at the
|Where International Criminals Go to Hide
It is hard to defend a
number of law enforcement practices in Thailand. I write a crime series. In the
process of writing, I’ve researched the Thai police realm from investigation to
laying charges. The feature of Thai policing largely—for better and worse—in
each of the 12 Vincent Calvino novels. I also was a law professor for ten
My background gives me a
perspective on Thomas Fuller’s NYT article titled Thailand’s
Irresistible Attraction to Fugitives that leads with deadline
Bangkok: Give me your drug dealers,
your money launderers, your felons on the lam yearning to breathe free.
Thailand has never advertised
itself as a beacon for fugitives, but the world’s wretched refuse—to tweak the
noble words inscribed on the Statue of Liberty—seem to show up here in
Foreign fugitives “in
droves?” It makes Bangkok sound like there’s a foreign gangster on every corner.
If that’s the case, they are well hidden. As far as I know there is no Index
that ranks countries according to bolt-hole attractiveness for those on the lam.
Fuller’s speculation is that Thailand would top that list. I doubt it. I
seriously doubt that Thailand would make the top twenty in such an Index.
And I’d wager that the USA would have a higher ranking (more about that later).
What’s the evidence for this influx of foreign fugitives? A WikiLeaks
cable that came out of the US embassy in Bangkok. And some news reports of
foreign murderers and child molesters arrested over the past couple of
A popular fall back
rationale for all of these fugitives in Thailand is that the police and
immigration officials are corrupt. No one could say with a straight face that
that corruption doesn’t exist in the police force in Thailand. That’s separate
issue. The question is whether corruption is a credible explanation for all of
these fugitive criminals hiding out in Thailand? Even as a fiction crime writer,
I would find it hard work to show how the cops would find where these criminals
were hiding. Of course they could stop every dodgy looking farang on the street
and run them through a series of questions about crimes they might have
committed. Obviously that might be fun to contemplate, in reality it is a
You might ask, why not
catch these criminals as they try to sneak into the airport in Bangkok? The
tourist presents her/his passport as an immigration officer examines the
passport, then the tourist, before asking:
IM: Mr. Tourist, do you have any
outstanding conviction against you?
IM: Do you have any suspicion of
anyone about to lay charges against you?
Tourist: Well, come to think of it
there was that murder in Chicago.
There’s a perfectly good
reason this line of questioning—and with that ending—just won’t happen. First
criminals would lie through their teeth. Second, about 20 million tourists are
expected to visit Thailand this year. It would take a countless hours, and the
additional recruitment of thousands of personnel, not to mention new software to
process a due diligence investigation on each person. After six months of
queuing at the airport, the annual holiday would be over for most people only to
be told when it was their turn, they’d already overstayed their visa and were
subject to deportation.
Let’s say that we profile
people who look shady. Twenty million Tourists is still a pretty large
number. What is the pay off for looking for people who have broken a law outside
Some facts. That Wikileak
US Embassy cable indicated that over the period of 30 years, 135 people were
extradited from Thailand to the States. That works out to 4.5 criminals a year
who were returned to the States. This isn’t my definition of ‘droves’ foreign
criminals or any other species. Try finding 4.5 of something in a vat of 20
million something and see how easy that is. When I lived in New York City in the
mid-80s, 4.5 criminal acts per hour would have been closer to the mark.
And most of them looked pretty foreigner, and I suspect they were all wanted
back in their home countries for some felony or other. So now 4.5 American
fugitives hiding in Thailand per year is new threshold for news from Thailand to
get reported in The New York Times.
And talking about the
American system, of course a foreigner getting a visa can be a problem, but the
daily traffic of people sneaking in from Mexico and Canada into the States no
doubt includes people running from the law. And I suspect those numbers are
substantially in excess of 135 people over a 30-year period—people who have
committed crimes, who have been convicted of crimes, and who are on the run. Of
course we have no way of knowing for sure.
Mexico isn’t likely firing
up a room of lawyers to request return of their bad guys. They’re probably glad
to get rid of them. Let the Americans deal with them. That wouldn’t be a bad
policy. Saves the cost of prison, courts, and prosecutors. There are laws
against dumping of goods, but as far as I know there’s no law to prevent one
country dumping their criminals into another one. Over 30 years, I suspect more
than 135 Thai nationals have elected to hide out in the USA rather than return
Stories like the NYT
article circulate for a while and die. A couple of years ago according to the
BBC, Brazil was the
international haven for criminals on the lam. Some websites feature top ten
lists of criminal hiding places. Anyone can play the game. Some seem to have a
better grasp of how the world is organized than others. Here’s one with
Canada in the number one slot and
Wisconsin at number 10. Someone at the website must think that Canada is a state
like Wisconsin is a state. And suspicious countries like Thailand, the
Philippines, Cuba find their places somewhere on the list.
No doubt about it. The
world is a shrinking place for international fugitives. Modern technology will
wipe out the usual hiding places. Fugitives will have to disappear deep in to
whatever jungle remains and live in caves. Where we can reach consensus (at
least among our friends) are the people we’d personally like to put on a
fugitive wanted list and who is hiding out and scratching mosquito bites and
Make your list. Sleep on
it. Then tomorrow send it to The New York Times. I am certain they’d be happy to
|Self-deception and Crime Bosses
We had a power shortage at Eel Swamp. When that happens everything seems to shut down from computers to water pumps. People tumble out of their houses with a vaguely confused look, standing in the street, looking around as if the Power Gods might roll up in a van and reconnect them to their lives.
While the power was out, crime continued. A local man was shot in the field, on his motorbike, as he was on his way to tend to his horses. His sister reported hearing seven shots. In another news, a Pattaya police sting operation went sideways and two people were killed in the ensuing gunfight.
Daily life has this riptide of uncertainty and evil that pulls you out of your depth, disturbing you life and threatening to harm you. Sometimes these forces blow out your lights. Other times they extinguish, like blowing out a candle, a couple of human lives. Crime is one of those things that even a power shortage can’t stop. But the crimes that happened this Friday will never be reported outside of Thailand, and likely won’t receive much coverage here. The rough and tumble of life isn’t all that newsworthy.
What captures the attention of the press are crimes and big time crime bosses. Marlon Brando in the Godfather comes to mind. Al Capone with his trademark cigar. Big John Gotti in his expensively tailored suits. Every culture has an equivalent set of figures who cross the stage of life and then fade into the past as memories of them, no longer fed by the press, dim and their replacements take center stage.
This has been the natural cycle of crime and the bosses who head the organized criminal activities. It has also cycled through countless books, movies and TV series. My feeling is that times have changed and along with that change has come a revision of who are the crime bosses. We have moved beyond the iconic Godfather. The public reconfiguration of the identity of crime bosses is one plausible explanation for the popularity of crime fiction around the world. Who are they? What role do the new digital media play in exposing them and their activities?
The new crime bosses are investment bankers, hedge fund managers, corporate CEOs, and politicians of one type or another. They have advanced university degrees. These men and women know how to rob a bank without a gun. They appear in posh magazines, at film openings, and support the arts. But unlike the old days, not everyone is fooled. The International Criminal Court has been busy trying some of these big time criminals. And in the future they will likely get a shot at a new crop of political leaders.
The public, if not the courts and prosecutors, have been criminalizing economic and social conduct for as long as we’ve lived in villages and cities. The major change is that with the Internet we have internationalized criminal bosses. They are no longer just locally recognized faces; the modern new crop of criminal bosses are on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter. They are known to billions.
They represent a different breed of crime boss, and belong to a different category of criminal conduct. In the past we have been content to allow the authorities the power to define crime and the criminals who commit them. Now people are waking up and talking about how this game ‘we define the crime’ has been largely rigged from the start in favor of the elites.
The idea is spreading that around the world we’ve all been sleep walking. That self-delusion about modern economic and political criminal networks has allowed masses of people to become victims without a remedy. The people who died in my neighborhood today will sadly leave behind grieving relatives and friends. But beyond that circle of sadness and despair, the ripples won’t wash to your shore. Government officials who use torture, disappearance, extra-judicial killings create the kind of ripples that wash over your head. Sooner or later, as the sanction of the State launders the crime, exonerates the actors, and is sold as protecting the public.
Crime fiction authors have moved into this field of gray. A place haunted by forces larger than any old-fashioned crime boss. The best crime novels reveal a noir-like world where even the most law-abiding citizen may find himself mugged not by a drug addict but by a hedge fund manager that invested his life savings in mortgages. Everywhere I go on the Internet, I find a growing anger and resentment, as people are no longer willing to adjust to spending their lives inside extended crime families that would have made Capone and Gotti green with envy. The Arab Spring as an example of people seeking to replace the old crime syndicates that pretended to be governments.
The future holds a rich store of experience for the crime author. And the best ones are coming around to the view that readers are interested in novels where the conflict in crime reflects this new breed of criminals who don’t look like criminals and are treated like celebrities. It doesn’t take much digging to find examples of public indignation when one of the new bosses is trapped, cornered and exposed.
It’s a time for self-examination and reflection. As the passions run high, we’d do well to consider this quote from Noam Chomsky:
“I’ve reviewed a lot of the literature on this, and it’s close to universal. We just cannot adopt toward ourselves the same attitudes that we adopt easily and in fact, reflexively, when others commit crimes. No matter how strong the evidence.”
|Bigamy and Why Vincent Calvino will never get Married
Last week rather than
criminal activity I wrote about metaphysical disturbances. This week I return to
crime. Criminal behavior is conduct or activity that a consensus of people
within a culture chooses to sanction. Murder is universally criminalized. No
society that we have evidence of has allowed members of the community to freely
murder each other. The state always intervenes. We also use the criminal law to
rope off the perimeter of what is an acceptable family unit. Bigamy is the legal
Most countries forbid a
man to have more than one wife, or a woman from having more than one husband
(which is technically called polyandry). That is two plus one, at the
same time is a big no, no. You might argue that in the West, with easy divorce,
sequential marrying has become an overpriced, but degraded form of bigamy. But
in places like Senegal, Mali, Ghana, Nigeria (west Africa) and most Muslim
countries, in practice, there is no law against bigamy. The numbers (there is a
limit) don’t bother them the way it bothers a lot of people.
Thailand is an example of
a country where officially a man can have only one ‘legal’ (meaning registered)
wife. But in practice a large number of Thai men have unofficial ‘minor wives’.
Polygyny is another concept. It is usually defined as a family unit with one man
and multiple wives. It is another one of those impossible-to-remember-how- to
spell terms best left to dusty sociology books.
If you live in California,
here are the steps to report
bigamists. There isn’t information whether
there is a reward in California for dropping the dime on a bigamists.
Sonthi Boonyaratglin, former Commander-in-Chief of the
Royal Thai Army and former head of the Council for National
military junta that ruled the kingdom, according to Wikipedia has two wives. He is also a Muslim
and has made no attempt to conceal his matrimonial status. And as far as can be
known, no one has sought to arrest him on charges of bigamy. Indeed there
appears to be an unofficial policy of allowing Muslims to have more than one
wife. Indeed, it seems the unofficial practice is not to prosecute bigamists in
In India, with both Hindu and Muslim
populations, the former prohibiting bigamy and the latter allowing it, there has
been the occasional conversion to Islam in order to marry a second wife without
divorcing the first. It didn’t work well for a politician who tried
It might be useful to seek
out legal advice before taking on that second, third or fourth wife. Though, as
a former lawyer, I can tell you the advice will be that marrying a second woman
without divorcing the first is a breach of Thai law. But will you go to prison?
Bigamy isn’t exactly murder. The answer a lawyer would give is: it depends on a
number of factors, including: your religion, nationality, social status, and
attitude of the family of those involved. Or he/she might say—your chances of
getting away with the crime are pretty good. Just get on with it and see what
happens. Then stick the client with a bill for a grand. Anyone thinking about
bigamy usually has got a high pain threshold and an apparently high capacity for
spending money on a whim. The potential bigamist is one of the best clients a
lawyer could have.
Now, after the lawyer
rant, back to Thai law. Marriage registration in Thailand is done on a
provincial basis. Given there are seventy-seven provinces, and the lack of
computerized systems in some of the more remote provinces has opened up
possibilities for the man wishing to register more than one wife.
In 2005, a Bangkok Senator
named Wallop was quoted by The
Nation as saying, “officials at the
Provincial Administration Department of the Interior Ministry had confirmed that
married men often registered double or even triple marriages by taking new
brides at remote locations where official computer systems were not available to
check their marital status. A few polygamous souls married even four times
without a single divorce, Wallop added.”
Thai wives had complained
to the government and they ‘looked into it’ and with most things the government
looks into, they just looked.
Thai law is clear on this
status issue, providing, “Applicants must not be currently married.” Conditions
of Eligibility for Marriage, Thai Civil Law, B.E. 2529. But Thai law is clear on
a large number of matters and that doesn’t necessarily mean the implementation
and enforcement of the law is consistent or reliable.
Thailand isn’t unique in
the non-enforcement of the bigamy law. Canada also prohibits polygyny by law
although there hasn’t been a prosecution for violating that law for sixty
The media loves a good
bigamy story (as obviously do bloggers). A twenty-four year old Thai man called
Mr. Wichai, a native of Samut Songkram province, who by all accounts was a
pretty ordinary fellow. He earned his livelihood hawking second-hand goods. But
he must have had something quite special going for him as he married, (according to
gorgeous twins named Ms. Sirintara and Ms. Thipawan, aged twenty-two. The
bridegroom professed “his sincerest ‘equal love’ for both of them.” Apparently
both sets of parents were very happy for the newly wedded threesome. Mr. Wichai
sweetened the pie by contributing a dowry of “eight baht of gold and 80,000
baht” for each of his new brides. There was no mention of how a second-handed
goods sales guy got his hands on that kind of wealth. In fairness, that is an
omission from many local stories involving politicians, police, soldiers, or
ordinary second-hand merchandise vendors.
Every man would like to
have had Mr. Wichai’s mother as their own. Somehow I can’t imagine my mother
preparing two rooms in the family house for her son and his two brides. But Mr.
Wichai’s mother did. The question lurking in the back of everyone’s lurid mind
was what were the sleeping arrangements? Mr. Wichai was prepared, and quoted as
saying, “’Absolutely no problems! For the first three nights of the week, I will
sleep with Ms. Thipawan and the next three will be spent with Ms Sirintara. As
for every Saturday, the three of us will sleep together’.” Right out of the
Ten Minute Manager for Bigamists: Guide of How to Manage Your Time
From time to time, it
would be good if the press filed follow up reports to see how the schedule has
worked out, whether any police have been around with warrants, and whether he
claims tax deduction for both wives. At the end of the day, in the case of the
crime of bigamy, at least in Thailand and Canada, there’s no ground swell to
charge and imprisonment the miscreants.
There is a downside (isn’t
there always?) in turning a blind eye to the Mr. Wichais of the Asian world.
Given a preference for male babies there is a fairly significant imbalance
between males and females. Allowing the alpha males with tough and status to
take two or three or more women out of the marriage market leaves that many more
males without the hope of finding a woman to marry. History has a lesson that
when too many young men fighting over too few women often leads to violence and
war. While Mr. Wichai has a rather tight schedule. The idle, single young men
who won’t be finding a wife, have time on their hands and anger in their hearts.
There are other more serious crimes that such men ultimately commit without the
presence of a good woman to keep their impulses in check. The tragedy of life is
there is no free lunch.
My feeling is that over
time Mr. Wichai case might provide evidence of a theory I have as to why neither
Thailand nor Canada actively goes after bigamists. It is this. Bigamy is one of
the few crimes where the perpetrator is most likely to become the victim. If he
is indeed married to several women at the same time, with until death do us
part, that sound pretty similar to a series of consecutive life sentence without
the possibility of parole. He’s joined the serial killer who also fall into the
throw away the key sentencing category.
If after the romantic
interlude, things don’t turn out—those extra partners increase the probability
of conflict—well, you get the picture. He’s gonna suffer big time. That lawyer’s
fee cited above, there was a reason for talking about a grand fee to warn the
guy to have second thoughts before those additional weddings. Because when he
comes back through the door after one of the wives goes after him legally, that
one grand is just a nice warm up to the total damage lawyers and courts will be
inflicted on him. And rather than going back to a lonely apartment to drink a
nice whiskey, he goes back to a couple of other women waiting for him. I don’t
think they’re gonna be in a great mood. He’s gonna wish for solitary confinement
in a maximum security prison is my guess.
As that Asian philosopher
Vincent Calvino once said: “One wife is never enough, and two are one too
Having been married for
ten years to one intelligent, caring, insightful and kind wife, I can say that
Calvino is wrong on this one. With the right woman, one wife can indeed be just
right. May be its time for Vincent Calvino to get married. And as a writer, I
have to stop blowing up, stabbing and shooting all the potential women he falls
in love with.
Note to self: Find Vinny a
wife pretty much like your own.
Note from agent: Are you
f***king crazy? Happiness would kill any noir crime series.
Note to Calvino: Nothing
personal. Just remember once you get too involved, it is inevitable. She’s gonna
get whacked. Sorry, but it’s the nature of the writing game.