One more question I hope you can clarify. I believe there is a lot of misinformation about this case in the media. But the most critical issue goes like this (quoted from sfgate):

Newsom testified that the city had been "in peril" because officials were blocked from access to police records, payroll data and other information.

The idea is he has brought down the city network and cut off certain department from access. But a conflicting account from more technical source is that the city network is fully functional, only that IT is unable to administer the network. Which one is a more true picture?

This probably won't change the verdict. But the public (and the mayor) should get a clearer picture on the actual extent of the problem before making their judgement.

Thank you for sharing all the detail with us. This helps a lot as there are so much misinformation in the media. For all the misstep Mr Childs has made, I feel really bad for him. He has spent 2 years in jail already while other the drug dealers walk free and make loads of money. This is just not right.

From yestarday's interview with Chevron's CEO David O'Reilly:

we're focused in our biofuels technology work is how to make ethanol out of something that is already going to be thrown away, like farm waste products.

He believe as a company that the most important source of new energy is energy efficiency and the company is investment on a number of alternative energy search. Seems quite astute for an oil man.