November 2009

Philippines charges clan heir with 25 murders

GENERAL SANTOS, Philippines (AFP) –
Philippine prosecutors on Tuesday filed 25 counts of murder against a clan leader's son whom they say led the election-related massacre of 57 people last week, officials said.

The charges against Andal Ampatuan Jnr were filed in a court in the southern city of Cotabato, which has jurisdiction over the site of the November 23 massacre, said prosecutor Edilberto Jamora.

Other members of the influential Ampatuan clan, including the family patriarch, provincial governor Andal Ampatuan Snr, were also summoned to submit affidavits in the investigation into the massacre in Maguindanao province.

Ampatuan Jnr had previously faced seven counts of murder for the massacre. Jamora said he was only being charged with 25 murders so far because authorities had only processed 25 death certificates.

Alleged armed followers of the Ampatuans murdered 57 people including the wife and two sisters of his bitter rival, Esmael Mangudadatu. Also among those killed were journalists, lawyers and other civilians.

Prosecutors said Ampatuan Jnr led the killings to prevent Mangudadatu from challenging him in the May 2010 race for governor of the province.

The killing has outraged the nation and embarrassed Philippine President Gloria Arroyo, who has longstanding ties with the Ampatuans.

The Ampatuans control many local positions in the southern province of Maguindanao and have hundreds of armed followers there.

Term Life Insurance

Neither FAS 113 nor SAP 62 defines the terms reasonable or significant. Ideally, one would like to be able to substitute values for both terms. It would be much simpler if one could apply a test of an X percent chance of a loss of Y percent or greater. Such tests have been proposed, including one famously attributed to an SEC official who is said to have opined in an after lunch talk that a 10 percent chance of a 10 percent loss was sufficient to establish both reasonableness and significance. Indeed, many insurers and reinsurers still apply this 10/10" test as a benchmark for risk transfer testing.

* Locked funds insurance is a little-known hybrid insurance policy jointly issued by governments and banks. It is used to protect public funds from tamper by unauthorized parties. In special cases, a government may authorize its use in protecting semi-private funds which are liable to tamper. The terms of this type of insurance are usually very strict. Therefore it is used only in extreme cases where maximum security of funds is required.

Term Life Insurance

Army helps vets with `invisible wounds' find jobs

SAN ANTONIO – Richard Martin keeps a rearview mirror on his desk to prevent co-workers from startling him in his cubicle. The walls are papered with sticky notes to help him remember things, and he wears noise-canceling headphones to keep his easily distracted mind focused.
Martin, an Army veteran who was nearly blown up on three occasions in Iraq, once feared that post-traumatic stress disorder and a brain injury would keep him from holding down a civilian job, despite years of corporate experience and an MBA.
"Here I am with this background and I'm having problems with my memory," said Martin, a 48-year-old engineer and former National Guard major who now works for Northrop Grumman, helping to devise ways to thwart remote-detonated bombs.
The defense contractor recruited him through its hiring program for severely wounded veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan. The company consulted occupational nurses on how to help him do his job without becoming overly nervous when someone, say, drops a heavy object. Martin figured out other tricks, like the headphones, on his own.
But Martin is one of the lucky ones.
Army officials say many new veterans suffering from PTSD and brain injuries struggle to find and keep a civilian job. Advocates say many employers don't know how to accommodate veterans with these "invisible wounds" and worry that they cannot do the job and might even "go postal" someday.
"There is a stigma attached to the invisible wounds, and it's largely borne out of ignorance," said David Autry, a spokesman for Disabled American Veterans. "There's a fear that somebody will go off the deep end."
The Army's Wounded Warrior Program, which helps veterans adjust to civilian life, has been reaching out to employers to educate them and encourage them to hire former soldiers with invisible wounds.
It conducts briefings to brace potential employers for soldiers who might not be able to work regular hours or might startle too easily, suffer outbursts or require time off for counseling.
About 90 severely wounded veterans have found work with the help of the Wounded Warrior Program since it began offering job assistance last year, though the Army does not break that down by injury type.
The severely wounded soldiers now returning from the wars suffer primarily from PTSD and severe brain injuries rather than lost limbs. About a third, or 1,950, of the 5,400 soldiers and veterans in the Wounded Warrior Program have PTSD as their primary injury, while about 970 are in the program because of brain injuries. About 770 are amputees.
For the invisibly wounded, the losses can be as minor as slight memory lapses and as severe as debilitating flashbacks and a hair-trigger temper. Some have blurred vision and difficulty concentrating.
Disabled soldiers qualify for disability payments, but those are often barely enough to live on, and many want to work, if only for their self-respect. The problem is that many employers are far less prepared to take on former military personnel with mental and cognitive disabilities than those with burns or lost limbs.
"Employers find it easier to accommodate those physical disabilities. They can get special equipment," said Sue Maloney, who works with veterans in the Wounded Warrior Program in the Seattle area. But "you can't always see the wounds or the injuries."
Kyle Salisbury, 21, went to work shortly after he retired from the Army last year with a brain injury caused by two large blasts in as many days.
His employer was excited about hiring a wounded Iraq veteran, but Salisbury often could not work because of severe headaches. A second job driving a truck did not work out either because of his occasional nausea and blurred vision. He quit both jobs.
"Right now my job prospects are zero," said Salisbury, who lives with his wife and 3-year-old nephew in Bellingham, Wash. He is attending community college while he decides what to do next.
With less than $3,000 a month in disability payments, "the bills take up all the money," he said. "I definitely don't live a worry-free life."

The transition for Martin, who works in Clearfield, Utah, appears to have been easier. He said minor adjustments to his office, combined with a Blackberry, rehab and medication, have allowed him to function well. He learned about the noise-canceling headphones from a fellow passenger on an airplane.

Karen Stang, manager of Northrop Grumman's hiring program, said that adjustments had to be made for veterans with PTSD or brain injuries, but company managers are happy with the new hires.

The company consults with occupational nurses about what accommodations should be made and encourages veterans to be honest about what they need.

"Give them a chance," Stang said she tells other employers. "Really, look at what they bring as far as skills and help them manage their disability so they can succeed in their job."

___

On the Net:

Army Wounded Warrior Program: http://www.aw2.army.mil

Northrop Grumman Corp.'s Operation Impact: http://operationimpact.ms.northropgrumman.com/default.htm

U.S. offshore tax amnesty yields big response: IRS

WASHINGTON (Reuters) –
Some 14,700 rich Americans worried about a U.S. government crackdown on offshore tax cheats came forward to participate in a tax amnesty program, the top U.S. tax official said on Tuesday.

Participation in the Internal Revenue Service's amnesty program was "unprecedented" and the final number was nearly double the agency's estimate in October, U.S. Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Douglas Shulman told reporters in a telephone briefing.

The IRS amnesty program, which ended in October, offered reduced penalties for wealthy Americans who voluntarily disclosed previously undeclared foreign bank accounts and assets. "We were flooded with people coming in the final days of the program," Shulman said.

"The IRS has never got anything like that in response to prior initiatives," said Barbara Kaplan, a lawyer for high net- worth clients in New York. "It's a little higher than I anticipated based on the pace of my own practice and the panic that was out there."

While agency officials were still analyzing the amount of offshore assets and bank accounts disclosed, Shulman said "we are talking about billions of dollars coming into the U.S. treasury" from the amnesty program.

Of the 14,700 newly disclosed accounts, Shulman said many involved bank accounts in Switzerland and Europe, but assets were also hidden in more than 70 countries.

"The whole game around bank secrecy, around offshore (tax) evasion is changing" because of pressure from the U.S. Justice Department and from international capital markets, he said.

At the center of the U.S. efforts to combat tax evasion abroad is a case against Swiss banking giant UBS AG, which led the bank to agree to reveal the names of 4,450 client accounts.

Shulman also said the outpouring of hidden offshore accounts does not affect in any way the obligation of UBS to turn over those American account-holder names. There had been some speculation that success in the amnesty program would cut the obligation of UBS to turn over accounts.

"Some have misinterpreted this," Shulman said.

Although the amnesty program has ended, Shulman encouraged Americans with hidden offshore assets to continue to come forward and talk with the IRS about them. "It will be much worse for them if we find them first," he said.

CRITERIA

The U.S. and Swiss governments also released on Tuesday the criteria it used to arrive at the 4,450 accounts that parties agreed UBS would eventually turn over to U.S. authorities.

The Swiss Justice Department said it would hand over the names of wealthy U.S. clients of UBS with accounts holding more than 1 million Swiss francs ($986,200) where there is a reasonable suspicion of tax fraud.

Accounts of a lesser size could come under the deal where there is a "scheme of lies" identified, according to the document.

It describes suspicious activity that could be interpreted as tax fraud including the use of debit cards, cell phones or wire transfers to hide accounts.

Shulman said the agreement will give the U.S. accounts it is most interested in -- those where taxpayers exhibited the most egregious behavior, those that would be hardest for the U.S. to identify and accounts with the largest holdings.

Submission of data to U.S. authorities applies to UBS accounts held between 2001 and 2008 by U.S. citizens.

(Reporting by Kim Dixon, with additional reporting by Jason Rhodes in Bern, Switzerland; Writing by Julie Vorman, Editing by Maureen Bavdek)

Astronauts Inspect Space Shuttle for Damage (SPACE.com)

WASHINGTON — Astronauts aboard NASA's space shuttle Atlantis
will inspect their spacecraft's sensitive heat shield today for any signs of
damage incurred during launch.

The checkout is a now-standard precaution and NASA has no
specific cause for concern after Monday's smooth
liftoff from Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Fla., mission managers
said. Commander Charlie Hobaugh and his six-astronaut crew will use an
inspection pole tipped with laser sensors and cameras to scan the orbiter's
wing edges and nose cap for new dings or scratches.

"If there's been any impacts, things that have come off
the tank or some spare debris, or something has hit something, we can take a
look at it with the sensor packages and try to determine if it's something that
is kind of benign or something worth fixing with [a spacewalk]," said
mission specialist Leland Melvin in a preflight interview. "And so we'll
survey the port wing, the starboard wing and the nose cap and then make sure
that everything's safe."

The survey is set to begin at 8:13 a.m. EST (1313 GMT) and
will last about six hours. Astronauts will attach the 50-foot (15-meter)
inspection boom to the end of the shuttle's already 50-foot (15-meter) robotic
arm and use its cameras and laser sensors to scan Atlantis'
most sensitive areas.

"It's been very refined, well-scripted, developed over
numerous missions, a procedure that we go through now," Hobaugh said.
"It's a long day. It's a lot of intensive arm ops obviously but what we do
is we rotate our crew members through to keep 'em fresh."

Today's inspection has been part of every
shuttle mission plan after the tragic Columbia accident in 2003, when a
piece of insulating foam from that shuttle's external fuel tank broke off and
struck the orbiter's wing during launch, damaging the heat shield and leading
to the loss of the spacecraft during re-entry. Seven astronauts were killed.

Since then, NASA has devised new heat shield inspection and
repair methods, as well as modified shuttle fuel tanks to reduce the amount of
foam debris during launch. NASA officials said Atlantis' launch looked
relatively clean.

Bill Gerstenmaier, NASA's associate administrator for space
operations, said NASA observed three small pieces of foam fall from Atlantis'
fuel tank during launch, but that they occurred too late in the liftoff to
cause harm.

"They were minor because they were after the time when
they can really do damage to the orbiter," Gerstenmaier said after
Monday's launch. Nonetheless, engineers plan to pore over the data and video
gathered during the launch to be sure.

Atlantis is bound for the International
Space Station to deliver two massive carriers filled with spare equipment
for the orbiting laboratory. The astronauts plan to spend about 11 days in space,
with three challenging spacewalks and complex robotic work scheduled.

The astronauts'
day on Atlantis began at began with a wake-up call at 4:28 a.m. EST (0928
GMT). Mission Control roused the crew with the song "I Can Only
Imagine" by MercyMe, a tune selected for shuttle pilot Barry
"Butch" Wilmore by his wife Deanna to mark his first career
spaceflight.

"What a very pleasant song to wake up to, thank you for
playing that," Wilmore radioed Mission Control. "Thanks to my wife
for selecting it."

SPACE.com
Video Show - Riding the Space Shuttle
Image
Gallery - Shuttle Discovery's Midnight Launch
SPACE.com
Video Show - Inside the International Space Station 
SPACE.com is providing complete coverage of Atlantis'
STS-129 mission to the International Space Station with Staff Writer Clara
Moskowitz in Washington, D.C. and Managing Editor Tariq Malik in New York. Click here for shuttle mission
updates and a link to NASA TV.

 

Original Story: Astronauts Inspect Space Shuttle for DamageSPACE.com offers rich and compelling content about space science, travel and exploration as well as astronomy, technology, business news and more. The site boasts a variety of popular features including our space image of the day and other space pictures,space videos, Top 10s, Trivia, podcasts and Amazing Images submitted by our users. Join our community, sign up for our free newsletters and register for our RSS Feeds today!

Going Rogue: A guide to who gets whacked (Politico)

Sarah Palin may claim to scorn elites, but her new book will ring familiar to its Beltway readership.
Getting even with those who crossed her, praising her allies and generally putting a self-serving sheen on last year’s presidential campaign, “Going Rogue” is typical of the political memoir genre of recent vintage. It’s the sort of book that will send the political class scurrying to bookstores, eager to see how they fared in what’s known as “the Washington read.”
With no index, though, Palin’s book has made that ritual more difficult.
So POLITICO, having obtained a copy of the book before its Tuesday release, has created a reader’s guide to “Going Rogue,” grouping the many characters into three categories, based upon that familiar question insiders are already whispering to those who managed to snag a copy of the book: How did I come out?
FRIENDS:
The construct Palin uses to describe the 2008 presidential campaign pits most of her advisers, the endearingly-named “B Team,” against the dreaded staffers running John McCain’s campaign back in suburban Washington, often simply derided as “headquarters.”
She has especially kind words for the campaign officials she bonded with during the campaign and, in some cases, remains in contact with.
This “B Team” includes such aides as Jason Recher, Chris Edwards, Tracey Schmitt, Jeannie Etchart, Bexie Nobles, Matthew Scully, Randy Scheunemann, Steve Biegun.
All receive generous treatment.
Biegun is even spared by a key omission in the book. Even though it has been reported that he was responsible for the embarrassing prank call Palin took from a pair of French Canadian DJs posing as the President of France, Palin only identifies the aide as “a campaign adviser.”
“I felt bad for him because he was an absolutely stellar professional, so I knew these radio guys had to be really good to get around him,” she writes.
John and Cindy McCain receive fulsome praise throughout the book from Palin, him as a brave American hero and her as a mix of elegant lady and Every Mom.
But the Arizona senator is also portrayed as the final enforcer of the decision not to let Palin speak on election night, something that plainly pained her.
She recounts telling McCain in the campaign’s hotel suite in Phoenix on election night that she wanted to use her remarks to thank him:
“’No these guys have it covered,’ he said, nodding in [campaign chief Steve] Schmidt’s direction. ‘They’ve got it handled.’”
Palin then writes: “I knew that was that. I thanked John again for everything and walked out of the room.”
McCain’s close friend Joe Lieberman, the Connecticut senator, also won accolades from Palin for soothing her during a stressful debate prep session.
“God is going to see you through this,” Palin recalls Lieberman telling her, noting that she found it “so heartfelt, so genuine, so sincere.”

FOES:

Much of the portion of the book devoted to Palin’s time as vice presidential nominee and her last year in Alaska is filled with her grievances against a handful of McCain campaign aides and the media.

In particular, Palin trains her fire at Steve Schmidt, campaign advisers Mark and Nicolle Wallace and CBS news anchor Katie Couric.

Schmidt, especially, receives the brunt of Palin’s blasts.

She describes him as variously quick-tempered, profane, overweight, threatening and incompetent. Plus, she notes, he was a smoker. (Though she does allow at one point that he can inspire loyalty and manage the press).

Complaining about being muzzled, she writes: “I questioned Schmidt about what headquarters would and would not allow me to say. Schmidt was a busy guy; he didn’t have a lot of time to elaborate, no doubt. He replied coolly, ‘Just stick to the script.’”

Taking issue with what she said was Schmidt’s attempt to get her a nutritionist, Palin observes: “As he lectured, I looked at his rotund physique and noted that he used nicotine to keep his own cognitive connections humming along.”

Schmidt also comes in for rough treatment in an anecdote Palin says took place between the campaign aide and Scheunemann after reports in POLITICO and CNN detailed the tensions between the veep candidate and McCain’s staff.

Citing Scheunemann, who remains a Palin adviser, she writes: “Schmidt issued a threat that was veiled enough for deniability but clear as day if you were on the receiving end: if there were are any more leaks critical of anybody in the handling of Sarah Palin, then a lot more negative stuff would be said about Sarah Palin.”

When Palin got prank-called by the two disc jockeys impersonating the president of France, she again paints Schmidt in a negative light.

“One of the first calls was Schmidt, and the force of his screaming blew my hair back. ‘How can anyone be so stupid?! Why would the president of France call a vice presidential candidate a few days out?

“Good question, I thought. Weren’t you the ones who set this up?

“As Schmidt’s rant blazed on, I pictured cell towers between D.C. and Florida bursting into flame. I held the phone slightly away from my head.”

Schmidt is also singled out on election night as the heavy who told Palin she wouldn’t be able to deliver a speech along with McCain’s own concession.

“Absolutely not,” Schmidt said. “I don’t even know why you wrote a speech. Nobody told you to.

“That set me back on my heels. I was surprised that he was surprised.”

Of Nicolle Wallace, a former top Bush administration official, Palin writes, “I had to trust her experience, as she had dealt with national politics more than I had. But something always struck me as peculiar about the way she recalled her days in the White House, when she was speaking on behalf of President George W. Bush. She didn’t have much to say that was positive about her former boss or the job in general.”

 

Palin also casts Nicolle Wallace as something of an insensitive snob, recalling that the campaign adviser informed her that her clothing was inappropriate for a vice-presidential nominee.

“She flipped through my wardrobe with raised eyebrows,” Palin writes of Wallace from a scene in the candidate’s bedroom after she returned to Alaska for her interview with ABC’s Charlie Gibson. “No…no…no,” [Wallace] said as she slid each garment aside on its hangar.”

And so as to make unmistakable her disdain for Mark Wallace, Nicolle’s husband, the former Alaska governor includes a picture of the aide holding up his arms at her during a hotel room debate preparation session during a photograph montage otherwise devoted to upbeat images of Palin, her family and supporters.

“This picture says it all,” Palin writes in the caption. “A dark hotel room in Philadelphia and a frustrated Mark Wallace trying to tell me which of his non-answers I should give during debate prep.”

Palin never flatly accuses any of the top McCain advisers as being responsible for the leaks against her, but she comes close in recounting a scene from the hotel pool in Phoenix on the day after the election when the Wallaces stopped to say their good-byes.

“’I think you should know that for the next few days it’s going to get really nasty,’” Palin recalls Nicolle Wallace saying. “’Negative stories in the press. You should just be ready, that’s always how it goes. Hang on your hats!’

 

“That made no sense to Todd—why would anything ‘get nasty?’ And how could anyone know what would be coming in the media?

“But the Wallaces waved good-bye, and that was that.”

Often, names weren’t necessary to make the point—criticizing the generic “headquarters” sufficed, as in this lament from the last weeks of the campaign: “We asked whether we could expand the message, but by then it seemed, at least according to reports like the New York Times Magazine piece by Robert Draper, that headquarters might have already given up.”

Or from campaign’s end: “Since headquarters had micromanaged everything I did and said for weeks…”

Her home state of Alaska, its denizens and trusted aides like Meg Stapleton get much softer and kinder treatment, but Palin does take after some liberal opponents from back home—and a former colleague as well.

Though not mentioned by name, John Bitney is easily identifiable as the former aide whom Palin writes “turned out to be a BlackBerry games addict who couldn't seem to keep his lunch off his tie."

The policy director on Palin’s gubernatorial campaign, Bitney was her first legislative director in Juneau but is now a critic who is frequently interviewed by reporters.

Yet is CBS news anchor Katie Couric who is singled out for special treatment, emerging among media figures as Palin Enemy Number One.

“As for Katie Couric—where do I begin?” Palin writes, recounting what she concedes was an awful interview with the network anchor.

Though she accepts some culpability for the disastrous interview, Palin accuses Couric of having gone easier on Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden, and twice claims that the newswoman’s own clothing stylist was actually part of the team hired by the GOP to outfit the vice-presidential candidate for the campaign. Palin even takes a swipe at Couric’s patriotism.

Palin writes of a National Press Club event where Couric addressed journalists about the news media’s behavior immediately following the 9/11 attacks.

According to Palin’s account, Couric told her media colleagues: “The whole culture of wearing flags on our lapel and saying ‘we’ when referring to the United States and, even the ‘shock and awe’ of the initial stages, it was just too jubilant and a little uncomfortable.”

Writes Palin of this assessment: “Unbelievable.”

Among journalists, Couric may have come in for the most personal criticism but Palin also devotes considerable space to bemoaning the press corps in general. When, for example, she details her return to Alaska after the campaign, Palin grumbles about unnamed “pundits and reporters” who criticized her for “not attending the celebrity-packed events we were invited to Outside.”

Disputing some of the analysts who said then-Sen. Barack Obama outperformed McCain at the first presidential debate, Palin writes: “Granted, 90 percent of the newspeople covering the debate were liberal.”

At other times, Palin flatly accuses reporters as stalking and harassing her family.

IN BETWEEN:

Palin seems to spare those individuals who, unlike Schmidt, haven’t criticized her since the campaign or who she doesn’t seem to suspect as leakers who disparaged her, like the Wallaces.

So even though senior campaign aides Mark Salter and Rick Davis played a pivotal role in the campaign—and at “headquarters”—they are largely absent from the book.

Of Salter, she does allow that her first impression was that he seemed “friendlier and quieter than Schmidt” and was a loyal and influential adviser to the senator.

As she does with Biegun and the prank call incident, Palin appears to offer Salter anonymity in recounting the scene on election night when she was told she would not be speaking.

Even though Salter has been identified in other reports as one of the heavies who delivered the news, Palin writes only that a “senior staffer” said: “’You know you won’t be giving a speech.’”

Even though he was a Schmidt friend, her traveling chief of staff, Andrew Smith, isn’t bloodied too badly either.

"It seemed odd that we were being put in the hands of a man who had never run a campaign before, but Andrew seemed like a nice guy, and it wasn't my call,” she said of Smith, a Wall Street veteran.

Another of Palin’s top traveling aides, Tucker Eskew, doesn’t receive the praise that her other “B Team” allies do yet he isn’t scorned like other senior officials.

While calling him a “Southern gentleman,” Palin writes that Eskew stuck to her “like gum on a shoe.”

After events, she recalls, “he’d be waiting for me on the campaign bus steps with an indulgent smile that said, ‘Come over here and let me tell you what you did wrong, bless your heart.’”

Read More Stories from POLITICOOne-man crusade taking toll on EnsignObama, Hu talk economic cooperationVIDEO: Pundits on 'Going Rogue'McCain mum on Palin's accountSUBMIT VIDEO: A political comeback?

Seat Heaters

The lumbar is the region of the spine between the diaphragm and the pelvis; it supports the most weight and is the most flexible. The adjustable lumbar mechanisms in seats allow the user to change the seat back shape in this region, to make it more comfortable. Some seats are long enough to support full thigh.

A bucket seat is a seat contoured to hold one person, distinct from bench seats which are flat platforms designed to seat multiple people. Bucket seats are standard in fast cars to keep riders in place when making sharp or quick turns.

Seat Heaters

Oral arguments scheduled in Polanski's CA appeal

LOS ANGELES – A California appeals court will listen to oral arguments from Roman Polanski's attorneys about why it should require a lower court to decide whether to dismiss charges against the fugitive director, whether he is present or not.
Polanski in July appealed a Los Angeles Superior Court judge's decision not to dismiss the criminal case because the director didn't appear for a hearing. The California Second District Court of Appeal on Monday set oral arguments for Dec. 10.
Los Angeles authorities have considered the Oscar-winning director a fugitive since he fled the United States in February 1978 just before he was to be sentenced for unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old girl.
The appeal was filed before Polanski's arrest in Switzerland on Sept. 25. He has resisted efforts to return him to Los Angeles. Extradition paperwork filed by U.S. authorities states the maximum sentence that Polanski, 76, faces is two years in prison.
Polanski's French attorney has filed a new bail offer with Swiss authorities in an attempt to free the Oscar-winning filmmaker.
Lawyer Herve Temime said the offer Monday includes "adequate guarantees" that Polanski will not flee justice if released. Polanski is awaiting a decision on extradition to the United States.
Switzerland's Justice Ministry rejected a bail offer Friday, considering Polanski a high flight risk. They noted it was not a cash offer.
Temime said Sunday the new offer would include a "very, very significant" cash amount, but he gave no further details Monday.
The California appellate court's decision to schedule oral arguments came 10 days after prosecutors and Polanski's attorneys filed supplemental briefs on why the appeal should either be heard or dismissed.
Prosecutors have consistently argued that Polanski needs to be present for the judge to consider whether to dismiss the case against him. They argued the appeal should be barred by Polanski's status as a fugitive, and that his arrest has rendered the case moot since there is now a chance that he will be returned to the United States.
Polanski's attorneys, however, argued his status as a fugitive shouldn't disqualify his appeal. The Superior Court judge should be required to decide whether to dismiss the case because of a judge's misconduct in handling Polanski's original criminal case, they stated in court filings.
They also contend that because of the previous misconduct, Polanski should not have to attend the hearing.
Polanski's victim, Samantha Geimer, has repeatedly asked for dismissal of the charges against Polanski. Her attorney filed a declaration in the appeals case last month, stating that the case's re-emergence has caused her undisclosed health issues and problems at her workplace.
She sued Polanski years after he fled, and the director agreed to pay a $500,000 settlement to her. It is unclear how much of the money she received.