On Monday, the court was told by prosecutor John Price that the series of attacks had caused "widespread public alarm" as police and public alike tried to work out where the next bomb would arrive.

On Tuesday, Mrs Andrews told Oxford Crown Court that, as she opened the envelope, she joked: "Do we think this is suspicious?" She told the court: "I was just joking. It was because it was a Jiffy bag and because of what had been on the news."

She described how she broke the seal on an envelope contained within the original package and saw a bright flash and heard a very loud bang.

Mrs Andrews has suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder since the incident, the court heard, a condition which worsened following the recent car bomb attacks outside West End nightclubs in London. She suffers from permanent tinnitus and has a large scar on her upper chest where she had to receive stitches.

She told the court that she has only returned to work intermittently and said: "I've been forced out of my department because some colleagues refuse to work with me. One manager even wanted me to apologise to people for what I did that day."

The court heard how the bomb had been addressed to the IT manager of an old DVLA office which no longer exists. Most of the company's large volume of mail that it receives each day is opened automatically, but items sent to an old postcode, the court heard, are opened by hand in a separate room and the backlog this creates could mean that the bomb was received as early as Monday that week.

Cooper denies eight counts of causing bodily injury by means of an explosive substance, two counts of using an explosive substance with intent to disable and making and possessing an explosive substance.

All but one of the states with the death penalty and the federal government use lethal injection for executions. The only exception is Nebraska, which requires electrocution.

The standard method involves administering three separate chemicals: sodium pentothal, an anesthetic, which makes the inmate unconscious; pancuronium bromide, which paralyzes all muscles except the heart, and then potassium chloride, which stops the heart, causing death.

Attorneys for the two Kentucky men said at least half of the death row inmates facing imminent execution in the last two years have filed suit challenging the chemicals used in lethal injections. While various lower court federal judges have ruled on the issue, the Supreme Court has yet to decide it.

The award will be formally announced next month. It recognizes firms that provide free, or pro bono, legal services to the community.

Eckert Seamans is being honored for administering the county's Custody Conciliation Project, which provides free attorneys to disadvantaged people involved in custody disputes and works to help them reach custody agreements without litigation.

Most McKissock lawyers are expected to follow name partner Peter Hoffman to Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott while two other partners, Reed Haywood and John McGrath, will be joining Dickie McCamey & Chilcote. Like Burns White, both of those firms are based in Pittsburgh. Name partner Bruce McKissock has yet to decide where he will practice after being conflicted out of joining Eckert Seamans.

When the new group arrives, Burns White, Pittsburgh's 10th-largest law firm, will have 81 lawyers spread over Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Plymouth Meeting, Pa.,; Princeton, N.J., and Wheeling, W. Va. The firm focuses on litigation, business law and transportation law.

The Mundy group will continue to work from offices formerly occupied by McKissock & Hoffman located at 1818 Market St., 13th floor, in Center City at least through the end of next month, Mundy said.

"This is huge," says John Walsh, a senior associate at the Washington Office on Latin America, a human rights and democracy group. "It sets a precedent for the region."

This is the first time a former head of state has been extradited back to the country he once led to face justice.

Former Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic was handed over to an international court. But previous similar cases have been the result of executive branch negotiations. This marks the first time a national court has handed a leader over to a domestic court of another nation, say human rights experts. "This is a victory against the impunity that we have been accustomed to in Latin America. It is a major step forward for Chile, Peru, and the region as a whole," says Gloria Cano, a human rights lawyer in Lima.

A Peruvian court will now try Fujimori on charges ranging from his alleged approval of a death squad killing of 25 people to giving his intelligence chief, Vladimiro Montesinos, a $15 million "retirement" package after he was fired.

Fujimori has been a controversial figure in Peru since his upset victory in the 1990 presidential election. He vanquished hyperinflation and a leftist insurgency at the start of his 10-year rule (1990-2000), but at the end was hounded by charges of corruption and human rights abuses.

His government began to unravel after the 2000 presidential election. A secretly taped video was leaked showing Mr. Montesinos bribing an opposition congressman. Swiss authorities announced that they had discovered bank accounts traceable to Montesinos. Peruvian prosecutors estimate that more than $1 billion was stolen during the Fujimori years.

Montesinos has been in prison since 2001 on an array of convictions, including a 20-year sentence for drug trafficking.

As pressure built, Fujimori used his participation in the 2000 Asia-Pacific summit in Brunei to bail on his presidency. He stopped off in Japan, his parents' homeland, and resigned via fax. He stayed for five years. Fujimori secretly left Japan in October 2005, flying to Chile with the idea of then entering Peru.

Investigators here say that Fujimori miscalculated the reaction in Chile, thinking that he would be afforded the same treatment as another former president, Argentina's Carlos Menem, who had sought refuge in Chile. Chile rejected an Argentine extradition request in 2004.

But Mr. Menem was married at the time to a Chilean, the charges against him were purely economic, and Argentina officials only wanted to question him. In the case of Fujimori, the major charge involved human rights, which is a delicate issue in Chile, given the brutal dictatorship of former Chilean leader Augusto Pinochet, and it came with reams of supporting information.

Fujimori faces charges in the murder of 15 people in Barrios Altos, an inner-city Lima neighborhood, in 1991 and the killing of 10 people at the La Cantuta college the following year. Fujimori is accused of approving the actions of the paramilitary group, Colina Group, that did the killing. The inter-American court system has already found the Peruvian state culpable in both cases. Peruvian prosecutors would like Fujimori sentenced to 30 years for this case. The corruption charges carry sentences from two to eight years.

"I have waited many years for this day. We can finally imagine that there might be justice for our children," said Raida Condor, whose son, Armando Amaru, was killed in the university slayings.

Fujimori's extradition has immediate resonance in Bolivia, where the government is expected to request the extradition of former President Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada, who has lived in the US since being ousted in October 2003.

Rogelio Mayta, a human rights lawyer in Bolivia, says the Fujimori case "is a significant example for Latin America and will serve as a reference point for us."

Mr. Sánchez de Lozada is accused of unleashing the military on protesters calling for his resignation. More than 60 people were killed. Bolivian authorities have publicly called on the US government to return Sánchez de Lozada, but they are only now filing the legal paperwork.

The other active extradition case in Latin America involves former Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega.

"The governor would rather do this next week," Brown said. "He's totally focused on the fires."

California intends to sue the EPA in federal court to force a decision on whether California and 11 other states, including Rhode Island, can impose stricter vehicle standards.

The state has waited 22 months for a response from the agency to its petition to be allowed to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from cars, pickup trucks and sports utility vehicles.

California regulators need an answer because they want to implement a 2002 state law requiring vehicles sold in California to emit fewer greenhouse gases starting with model year 2009.

The proposed standard would cut emissions in California by about a quarter by the year 2030, according to the California Air Resources Board. But the law can take effect only if the EPA grants California a waiver under the federal Clean Air Act.

The EPA held hearings in May on the state's request, and administrator Steven Johnson has said he would make a decision by the end of the year. Meanwhile, the agency is also crafting national standards that it plans to propose by the end of the year.

California's lawsuit will allege there has been an "unreasonable delay" by the EPA in deciding on the waiver request, which the state first applied for in December 2005.

Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Washington also plan to join California's lawsuit against the EPA, officials in those states said.

While the federal government sets national air pollution rules, California has unique status under the Clean Air Act to enact its own regulations -- with permission from the EPA. Other states can then follow either the federal rules or California standards, if they are tougher.

Eleven other states -- Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington -- are ready to implement California's emissions standards. The governors of Arizona, Florida and New Mexico also have said their states will adopt the standard.

The Association of International Automobile Manufacturers, which represents Honda, Nissan, Toyota and 11 other foreign car companies, has sued to block the standards from taking effect.

It argues the standards would raise the cost of cars and could force manufacturers to pull some sports utility vehicles and pickup trucks from showrooms. Their case is pending in federal court in Fresno.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers has asked the EPA to deny the waiver, arguing there should be one federal standard.