To bind runes is to harness the ancient power of the runic symbols and direct their energy towards a specific purpose. This practice dates back to the time of the Vikings and has been used for various purposes, including protection, healing, and attracting luck. Binding runes involves combining individual runes to create a bindrune, which is a symbol that represents a specific intention. To begin, it is essential to understand the meaning of each rune and how they can be combined to create a desired outcome. Each rune has its unique energy and purpose, so it is crucial to choose the appropriate runes for the desired intent. Some common runes and their meanings include Fehu (wealth and prosperity), Algiz (protection), and Ansuz (communication and wisdom).
Some common runes and their meanings include Fehu (wealth and prosperity), Algiz (protection), and Ansuz (communication and wisdom). Once the necessary runes are selected, the next step is to combine them to form a bindrune. This can be done by superimposing the individual runes on top of each other or by intertwining their lines to create a unified symbol.
Matthew A. Pagan v. Broward County Sheriff, Officer Scott Israel, et al, No. 17-13439 (11th Cir. 2018)
Case: 17-13439 Date Filed: 10/19/2018 Page: 1 of 8 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 17-13439 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 0:15-cv-60209-WPD MATTHEW A. PAGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus BROWARD COUNTY SHERIFF, OFFICER SCOTT ISRAEL, Broward Sheriff’s Office, ARMOR CORRECTIONAL HEALTH, INC., MEDICAL HEALTH CARE FOR BROWARD COUNTY JAIL, OLOSMAR, Commissary Company for Broward County Jail, et al., Defendants-Appellees. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (October 19, 2018) Case: 17-13439 Date Filed: 10/19/2018 Page: 2 of 8 Before WILLIAM PRYOR, NEWSOM, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Matthew Pagan, a prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals a jury verdict in favor of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for violation of his First Amendment right to access to the court. He raises five claims on appeal, contending that the district court (1) violated his Sixth Amendment rights by denying his request for recess or adjournment to allow his lawyers to review voluminous, untimely discovery produced at trial, thereby constructively denying him the effective assistance of counsel; (2) abused its discretion in denying the recess; (3) erred by declining to give the jury a curative instruction after opposing counsel discussed inadmissible evidence on cross-examination; (4) erred by failing to question a juror who allegedly slept through part of the trial; and (5) gave jury instructions that impermissibly deviated from applicable law. Having found no reversible error, we affirm. I Pagan first contends that the district court should have granted his request to recess for the day to allow his lawyers to “review several hundred pages of never before seen documents submitted by the Appellee the day of trial”—specifically, Pagan’s medical file, relevant personnel files, and contact logs kept by the Sheriff’s office. The alleged error, Pagan contends, is serious enough to violate his 2 Case: 17-13439 Date Filed: 10/19/2018 Page: 3 of 8 Sixth Amendment rights, and also qualifies as an abuse of discretion by the district court. A plaintiff in a civil case has no constitutional right to counsel. Bass v. Perrin, 170 F.3d 1312, 1320 (11th Cir. 1999). Pagan’s § 1983 claim is a civil action. Accordingly, the district court could not have (even constructively) violated Pagan’s Sixth Amendment rights. Pagan correctly recognizes that we review district courts’ decisions to manage their dockets for abuse of discretion. Young v. City of Palm Bay, Fla., 358 F.3d 859, 863–64 (11th Cir. 2004). District courts have unquestionable authority to control their own dockets and are afforded broad discretion in deciding how to best manage the cases before them. Smith v. Psychiatric Sols., Inc., 750 F.3d 1253, 1262 (11th Cir. 2014). This discretion is not boundless, however, and we will find an abuse where the objecting party shows “specific substantial prejudice.” United States v. Jeri, 869 F.3d 1247, 1257 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 529 (2017). Our decision in Jeri is instructive here, as it also involved a request to review evidence received the day of trial. Id. at 1258. In that case, we found no abuse of discretion when the district court denied the request for a short continuance even when the defendant received a video that allegedly contained exculpatory evidence. Id. Though we suggested that it “would have been wiser to grant a continuance or at least short recess,” we nevertheless affirmed because the 3 Case: 17-13439 Date Filed: 10/19/2018 Page: 4 of 8 defendant had not shown “specific or substantial prejudice” caused by the denial. Id. at 1257–58. As in Jeri, even if we were to conclude that it would have been prudent for the district court judge to grant Pagan’s request for a recess, he has not shown that he was prejudiced by the denial. First, because two attorneys represented Pagan at trial, one had the opportunity to review the documents during trial while the other directly examined a witness. Second, and more importantly, Pagan has not demonstrated that anything in those documents had the potential to change the outcome of the trial. It thus appears that any error was harmless, as it did not affect Pagan’s substantial rights. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 61. II Additionally, Pagan asserts that the district court erred by failing to give the jury a curative instruction after opposing counsel asked Pagan’s only witness, Semie Robinson, about the details of his prior murder conviction. Specifically, after Robinson testified that he had been found guilty of first-degree murder, opposing counsel asked “[a]nd that was shooting a cab driver?” The district court sustained Pagan’s objection on relevance grounds, but it declined to give the jury a curative instruction to disregard the question. We give district courts considerable discretion to monitor and address attorneys’ arguments and, absent an abuse of discretion, will not disturb their 4 Case: 17-13439 Date Filed: 10/19/2018 Page: 5 of 8 decisions doing so. Allstate Ins. Co. v. James, 845 F.2d 315, 318 (11th Cir. 1988). We consider, among other things, the entire examination, the context of the remarks, and the objection raised to determine whether the “remarks were such as to impair gravely the calm and dispassionate consideration of the case by the jury.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). We recognize that a district court is in the best position to hear such remarks in context and to assess their effect on the jury. BankAtlantic v. Blythe Eastman Paine Webber, Inc., 955 F.2d 1467, 1474 (11th Cir. 1992). Here, we cannot say that it is probable that the failure to give curative instructions substantially influenced the jury’s verdict. Proctor v. Fluor Enters., Inc., 494 F.3d 1337, 1352 (11th Cir. 2007) (an error affects a party’s substantial rights when it probably had a substantial influence on the jury’s verdict). Though Robinson’s credibility, as Pagan’s only testifying witness, was important to this case, the parties had already stipulated that he had five prior felony convictions, including for first-degree murder. It is unlikely, then, that a single unanswered question about the victim substantially influenced the jury’s verdict. Id. Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not reversibly err by not providing the curative instructions here. III Next, Pagan argues that the district court erred by making “no attempt to 5 Case: 17-13439 Date Filed: 10/19/2018 Page: 6 of 8 take curative action or conduct voir dire of [a] juror to find out if he [was] actually sleeping.” We review cases of alleged juror misconduct on a case-by-case basis. Garcia v. Murphy Pac. Marine Salvaging Co., 476 F.2d 303, 306 (5th Cir. 1973). We will not lightly disturb the findings of the trial judge, who is in the “best position to determine the extent of [a juror’s] inattention.” United States v. Aguilar, 188 F. App'x 897, 900 (11th Cir. 2006). In particular, we give considerable weight to a district court’s finding that a juror was not asleep, even if it initially appeared that he or she was. See United States v. Hernandez, 921 F.2d 1569, 1577 (11th Cir. 1991) (finding that the district court was “well within its discretion” not to further question a juror alleged to have been sleeping because “each time the defense objected to the inattention of certain jurors, the trial judge specifically found that no jurors had been asleep at trial”); United States v. Holder, 652 F.2d 449, 451 (5th Cir. Unit B 1981) (holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by failing to voir dire juror because “[t]he court’s remarks demonstrate that the court had observed the juror in question and that it concluded that the juror was not in fact asleep”). Here, when informed of the possibility that the juror was sleeping, the district court determined—after personally observing the juror—that he “closes his eyes every now and then, but he’s not sleeping.” We decline to second-guess that factual determination here, and therefore conclude that the district court did not err 6 Case: 17-13439 Date Filed: 10/19/2018 Page: 7 of 8 in declining to voir dire the allegedly sleeping juror. See Garcia, 476 F.2d at 306 (declining to disturb the district court’s judgement that a juror merely “kept her eyes closed frequently” during the trial because “[t]here was no evidence offered that the juror was in fact asleep or inattentive”). IV Finally, Pagan argues—for the first time on appeal—that the district court’s instructions were “confusing” and thus “misled the jury.” Though we generally review jury instructions de novo to determine whether they misstate the law, Palmer v. Board of Regents of University System of Georgia, 208 F.3d 969, 973 (11th Cir. 2000), a jury instruction challenged for the first time on appeal is reviewed for plain error. Maiz v. Virani, 253 F.3d 641, 676 (11th Cir. 2001). Under plain error review, we will reverse only in exceptional cases where the error is so fundamental as to result in a miscarriage of justice. Farley v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 197 F.3d 1322, 1329–30 (11th Cir. 1999). Even assuming that the district court plainly erred here, Pagan has waived his opportunity to challenge the jury instructions under the doctrine of invited error. “Federal courts generally will not find that a particular instruction constitutes plain error if the objecting party invited the alleged error by requesting the substance of the instruction given.” Wood v. President & Trs. of Spring Hill Coll. in City of Mobile, 978 F.2d 1214, 1223 (11th Cir. 1992). Pagan filed the jury 7 Case: 17-13439 Date Filed: 10/19/2018 Page: 8 of 8 instruction ultimately used by the district court, and he objected neither to the manner in which the district court gave the jury instruction nor to its content. Because Pagan invited the alleged error, the district court did not reversibly err. AFFIRMED. 8
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
The bindrune should be aesthetically pleasing and meaningful to the practitioner. After creating the bindrune, it is time to charge it with intention and energy. This can be achieved through various methods, depending on personal preference. Some practitioners choose to meditate on the bindrune, visualizing their desired outcome and infusing the symbol with their intentions. Others may prefer to perform rituals or use physical objects like crystals or candles to channel energy into the bindrune. Once the bindrune is charged, it can be activated to manifest the desired outcome. This can be done by wearing the bindrune as a talisman, drawing it on objects or surfaces, or even engraving it on jewelry or tools. The bindrune serves as a constant reminder of the intention and continuously works towards manifesting it. Lastly, it is important to remember that binding runes is a personal and individual practice. While there are traditional meanings for each rune, it is ultimately up to the practitioner to imbue the bindrune with their own intentions and energy. Experimentation and personal exploration of the runes' meanings and combinations are highly encouraged to find what works best for each individual. In conclusion, binding runes is a powerful practice that allows individuals to tap into the ancient energy of runic symbols. By combining individual runes into a bindrune and charging it with intent and energy, practitioners can manifest their desired outcomes. It is a deeply personal practice that requires understanding and experimentation to achieve the desired results..
Reviews for "Binding Runes for Inner Healing: Releasing Past Wounds"
1. John - 2 stars - I was quite disappointed with "How to bind runes." The book promised to provide clear and concise instructions on using runes for various purposes, but I found the explanations to be confusing and overly complicated. The author also failed to provide any practical examples or illustrations, which made it difficult for me to understand the concepts. Overall, I felt like I wasted my money on this book and would not recommend it to others looking to learn about binding runes.
2. Sarah - 1 star - "How to bind runes" was a complete letdown for me. The author seemed more interested in showcasing their own knowledge on the topic rather than providing useful and practical information for beginners like myself. The language used in the book was too technical and inaccessible, making it hard to engage with the material. Additionally, the lack of real-life examples or step-by-step instructions made it challenging to apply the techniques described. I would advise anyone interested in learning about rune binding to seek other resources that are more beginner-friendly.
3. Emily - 2 stars - As someone who was excited to dive into the world of rune binding, I found "How to bind runes" to be quite frustrating. The book had a promising title and cover, but the content failed to deliver. The explanations were convoluted and lacked clarity, making it difficult for me to grasp the concepts being discussed. The author also neglected to provide any historical or cultural context, which I believe is crucial in understanding the significance of rune binding. Overall, this book left me feeling confused and unsatisfied with my attempt to learn about this ancient practice.
4. Michael - 1 star - I found "How to bind runes" to be highly disappointing. The author's writing style was dry and overly academic, making it hard to connect with the material. The book provided a lot of theoretical information without any practical application, which left me feeling like I had gained no usable skills or knowledge. The lack of clear instructions and examples made it challenging to follow along and replicate the techniques described. I would not recommend this book to anyone looking for practical guidance on rune binding.