About Masterclass Lady
Rosanne (Giallonardo) Simunovic began her musical career in Timmins, Ontario. She studied piano with Anne Pizzale and later, at an advanced level, with Soeur Anita Vaugeois (Sister Cecile of Les Soeurs De L’Assomption in Timmins). Her vocal and accompaniment skills were nurtured by her aunt, the late Dorothea Mascioli.
When Rosanne graduated from O’Gorman High School, she moved on to the University of Toronto where she continued her piano and vocal studies while attaining a Bachelor of Arts Degree. She was hired as a piano accompanist for several musical companies, most notably, the National Ballet Of Canada. She presently holds an A.R.C.T. Teacher’s Diploma in Voice from the Royal Conservatory of Music in Toronto.
Rosanne has studied choral conducting with numerous well known Canadian Conductors, including Wayne Riddell of Montreal, Quebec and the internationally renowned Dr. Elmer Iseler.
She has been a founding member of numerous community-based arts organizations: the Timmins Arts Council, later known as Arts & Culture Timmins, the Timmins Symphony Orchestra, and, the Timmins Youth Singers…as well as the TYS Alumnus choir, the Timmins Concert Singers. In 1987, she was also selected to be the conductor of the Timmins Board Of Education Choir, comprised of talented students from Grades 5 to 8.
In 1988, she was elected to the Board Of Directors of the Ontario Choral Federation (now known as Choirs Ontario), where she served as Chair of the Festivals Committee for six consecutive seasons. In 1996, in honour of the Ontario Choral Federation’s 25th Anniversary, Rosanne was selected as one of 25 recipients of the OCF’s Distinguished Service Award for outstanding contribution to the choral art. The ceremony was presided by Lieutenant Governor, Hal Jackman.
In November 1997, Rosanne Simunovic was selected by the Rotary Club Of Timmins to receive the prestigious Paul Harris Award for her years of dedication to the artistic development of young musical talent in Timmins.
In August of 2002, Rosanne Simunovic was selected by the Board Of Directors of Choirs Ontario to serve as Conductor of both the Provincial Junior and Teen Choir Camps, now renamed in honour of the Camp Benefactors, Don and Lillian Wright.
In November 2002, Rosanne was the one of the recipients of the Commemorative Medal for the Golden Jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II, honouring her work in the development of the arts in Timmins.
Under Rosanne Simunovic’s direction, the Timmins Youth Singers and the Timmins Concert Singers have been featured in numerous choral festivals and performing opportunities outside of Timmins. In 1985, they were selected to partici
July 16, 2013 
Finally! Someone with vision and fortitude. 
Masterclass Lady On MySpace.Com
Vocalist.Org
MasterClassLady.Com 
Yay Stevie!!! Well-done. I am also appalled by the travesty of justice that occurred in Florida. Our country is SO obsessed with guns. It’s shameful. RIP Trayvon.
Also, Rosanne, I’m sure that you are sad as I am about Cory Monteith. A tremendous tragedy & loss for all of us who admired him and Glee. Although we won’t know much until the autopsy is complete, I suspect that he died as a result of the illness of addiction. I know he is singing with the angels now.
LikeLike
Darlene – absolutely am I upset over Corey’s death. Been incredibly busy at my end but will add a topic soon. Sorry for the delay.
God Bless both Trayvon and Corey and may the rest in blessed and holy peace
LikeLike
I am so glad to see that you have posted your thoughts on this, MCL. I was shocked that Zimmerman was found not guilty. He would not have been in any position to have to defend himself if he had not followed Trayvon in the first place. Good for Stevie Wonder!!!
LikeLike
Louise – thank you. It was long overdue. I am heartbroken for Trayvon’s family and for young people in general. So sad that the justice system is so warped and that controls are not in place to protect the innocent.
LikeLike
I commend my six fellow citizens who thanklessly did their civic duty by serving on this jury and doing as they swore to do by rendering a verdict based on the evidence offered from the witness stand. They didn’t render a decision based on emotion, feelings, public pressure, preconceived notions or distortions and downright lies from the media. They based their decision on the letter of the law and I respect their decision. Had the law led them to decide against the defendant I would respect that decision too. This was a political prosecution to satisfy a constituency and I’m glad that it failed.
Stevie Wonder might be interested to know that this case had nothing to do with the “Stand Your Ground Law” in Florida.
LikeLike
Gene W – exactly. We can seat here and express our opinions, but we were not there in the jury (and let’s face it, how many of those people who criticize the jury’s verdict are those who themselves would’ve done their utmost to get out of the jury duty in such a case?). We haven’t heard the evidence.
All we have are the newspaper accounts and emotions. Yes, it’s a tragedy. But I don’t know all the details of the case as presented to the jury. I don’t know the law. So I most certainly don’t have all the facts to agree or disagree with the jury, but I do believe that they did their best in evaluating the evidence and following the law.
And yes, if the verdict had been different, I’d still believe that the jury did their best based on evidence and the law.
LikeLike
Based on the many cases of people being exonerated by DNA for crimes they were convicted of but actually didn’t commit, it is obvious that sometimes juries do not render correct verdicts. George Zimmerman had no business getting involved when he had been told by the police not to. The “constituency” had every right to seek justice in a court of law. I’m sorry the justice system failed them once again.
LikeLike
Louise – this may be correct, and yes, jurors get the verdicts wrong all the time (remember Simpson?); and yes nothing would’ve happened if Zimmerman hadn’t gotten involved.
However, as I understand the law – and I am no lawyer, the only issue that would define self-defense would be if at the moment in which Zimmerman shot the gun he was afraid for his life or not. The physical evidence in the case:
– Zimmerman had bruises on his head and neck, Graynor has bruises on his knuckles
– Zimmerman’s back was wet meaning he was at the bottom and Graynor on top
shows that Zimmerman was the one getting beat up including his head being bitten on the pavement which isn’t exactly safe in terms of health.
Answer the following questions:
If you are lying on the pavement and someone is beating your head on the floor would you be afraid for your life regardless of whether or not you brought it on yourself or will you think “I deserved it because I shouldn’t have gotten involved”?
If you have a gun and someone is beating your head would you shoot?
The jury has to act based on judge’s instructions and the letter of the law. Anybody who’s ever been in jury selections would’ve heard the instructions on how you have to follow the instructions whether or not you agree with them. You can always say – I couldn’t do it, and be immediately disqualified.
LikeLike
I have served on a jury.
Trayvon Martin was not armed. George Zimmerman used very poor judgment. Period.
LikeLike
Louise – Amen!
LikeLike
Hi Louise,
While cases are on rare occasion reopened, and verdicts overturned by “new evidence,” including DNA evidence, the jury in your example, who made their judgment in the absences of that evidence, did not “get it wrong.” Their verdict was correct based on the evidence presented to them. They acted in accordance with the oath they took as a juror and the law the judge charged them with before they began deliberations and based their verdict on the evidence that came from the witness stand during the trial. The situation that you describe is more likely the fault of the prosecutor rather than the jury. The reason that such cases are rare is because witnesses die or move away, evidence can be lost or returned to it’s owners, police officers move on from that job and no longer have their notes and so on. So some cases are reopened but can’t be properly presented the second time and the conviction is over turned. It doesn’t mean the jury was wrong. The OJ jury didn’t get it wrong in the sense that a mistake was made. What they engaged in was jury nullification. They wouldn’t have found him guilty with a HD video of him committing the crime and a confession signed in blood. The message they were trying to send wasn’t very well received and did no one any good except OJ.
If this jury got it wrong, based on the evidence that the jury heard in this case, how would you arrive at a guilty verdict on either of the two charges against George Zimmerman? I can’t come up with a way to come to that conclusion. Are you aware of other evidence against him that the jury wasn’t allowed to hear?
Keep in mind, as good (or bad) as it sounds rhetorically, being unarmed has no bearing on the other party’s right to use deadly force. If someone is trying to push you out of a high window are you required to only use your hands to resist them? Of course not. You can use any force, including deadly force if you have a reasonable fear of losing your life or sustaining serious injury.
And,
George Zimmerman had every right to be where he was, was under no obligation to stay in his truck, and was never under the lawful order of a sworn police officer to do otherwise.
Do I like this man? Not particuarly. Do I think the State of Florida proved any criminal charge against him? I do not. People can be expected to have strong feelings in a case like this. If they find fault with the law they should work through the legislative process to change it. The right to self defense is an inherent right of all free people. It comes to us from the English Common Law and isn’t likely to change anytime soon.
LikeLike
Hi, Gene,
You must either be an attorney or watch a lot of court TV.
My opinion about this case is a moral issue. Kitty asked me in a previous post if I would shoot someone who was beating my head. I would not because I would never, ever carry a gun. I could not possibly kill another human being. It is frightening that legally George Zimmerman apparently had a right to take this young man’s life because he felt threatened by him when Zimmerman was the one who put himself in this position. Was there any evidence to suggest that Trayvon pursued Zimmerman first? From what I’ve read, Zimmerman pursued Trayvon because after he reported him to the police, he thought Trayvon was going to get away. What had Trayvon done in the first place? It has not been shown that Trayvon was threatening anyone with bodily harm which is the only reason I can think of that would have made it okay in my mind for Zimmerman to have pursued him. Zimmerman felt empowered because he had a gun and I find that disgusting. I seriously doubt if he would have followed this young man if he had not been carrying a firearm.
I have a good friend who is a well-educated black professor. Her sons are the most well-mannered children of any race I’ve ever met. She has expressed to me how scared she is of sending them into the streets alone because of the color of their skin when they reach that age. No mother should have to live with that fear. The police are paid to be our protectors, not vigilantes. I am as frightened of them as I am of criminals. And George Zimmerman is nothing more than a vigilante in my opinion.
LikeLike
Louise – I agree. Gene is well-versed in legal procedures. Wow. Very impressive.
However, you and I are on the same page regarding this verdict.
What I can’t understand is this: how can the jury and the court justify this outcome when we only heard one side of the story – and by the person who started the ball rolling the night of Trayvon’s murder? It’s incomprehensible.
The boy meant no harm but Zimmerman, in his effort to become some sort of hero, decided to profile him and stalk him. Armed with a gun and pure evil in his heart.
You can bet if it was a white boy wearing a shirt and tie there would not have been a 911 call that night, let alone a murder
LikeLike
I am so glad you said that, MCL, because I completely agree with you.
LikeLike
Thank you Louise. I rarely get into this black and white issue but I cannot stay silent anymore. Especially now that black people fear for the lives of their young ones in light of this verdict.
The jury had a choice – manslaughter. And the judge could have invoked a more lenient penalty if she felt compelled to do so.
LikeLike
Gene you and I are on the same page! I watched most of the trial. If I had been on the jury I to would have found him not guilty.
What frustrates me is all the adults around that instead of posting positive ways to change things. Post things to get others riled up to believe their point of view.
I believe two people lost their lives that night. BOTH made poor choices. One, Zimmerman who chose to follow Trayvon and Trayvon for getting upset that he was being followed and turned around and attacked Zimmerman. And yes Trayvon did the attacking. He could just as easily continued on to where he was staying. But he chose to confront and attack. I have to disagree that if it had been a white boy in a hoodie that Zimmerman wouldn’t have followed him. He would have still followed anyone that didn’t seem to belong in the neighborhood. That community had a very high crime rate, hence the neighborhood watch group.
I pray that as humans we can learn to love everyone no matter what the color of their skin is or what religion they practice. I believe we are all children of a Loving Heavenly Father and I believe we are all brothers and sisters.
Hope I haven’t offended anyone. PEACE!!! 🙂
LikeLike
Gemzone – I appreciate your comments. Spoken right from your heart and I hope that some good can come from this horrible, devastating mess.
If Trayvon attacked, it was because he was pursued and threatened. He wasn’t looking for a fight but GZ sure was. Plus he was armed with a gun.
LikeLike
“I have served on a jury.
Trayvon Martin was not armed. George Zimmerman used very poor judgment. Period.”
Poor judgement is not a legal offense. You say you’d not be in this situation because you’d not carry a gun. Neither will I, if I had one in my hand I’d probably shoot myself in the foot given my coordination, nor would I ever be able to hurt anybody. However, I see your response as a cop-out because you didn’t really answer if you’d defend yourself with any means at your disposal if you were lying on the ground and someone were beating your head. Sure, Graynor was unarmed, but hitting someone on the head can kill without any weapon.
Do I care about Zimmerman – no. But you seem to think that the jury should’ve ignored the law in this case. Are you saying that the legal system should ignore the law? that we should ignore the presumption of innocence? Shall all juries make decisions based on what they consider moral and throw the law out of the window? Do you realize to what this would lead?
The law doesn’t operate on emotion nor does it penalize people simply for poor judgement or bad choices unless the choices violate the law. By law we have presumption of innocence, and it’s up to the prosecution to prove that someone is guilty. For the murder charge So let’s look at the law here:
1. Zimmerman didn’t violate the law by carrying a gun since he had the license.
2. Zimmerman didn’t violate the law by following Graynor. It was bad judgement – true, bad judgement isn’t illegal.
3. Did the persecution proof that he had intention to kill when he went after Trayvon? Please, show the proof.
4. Did the persecution proof BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT that he was not in fear of his life at the time he fired his weapon? No, not only that, physical evidence in the case showed that he could’ve been in fear of his life. Just the fact that Trayvon didn’t have a gun doesn’t mean he couldn’t have killed Zimmerman with his fists. Zimmerman was the one with his back on the floor. Whether or not his prior actions are responsible for it are irrelevant since he didn’t physically attack Trayvon – Trayvon had no physical marks on him except for broosed knuckles which shows that he was the one beating Zimmerman.
“The jury had a choice – manslaughter. And the judge could have invoked a more lenient penalty if she felt compelled to do so.”
For ANY charge there has to be a proof that Zimmerman wasn’t acting in self defense AT THE MOMENT HE FIRED. Not before (unless there is a proof that he pursued Traynor with the intention to kill). You all seem to forget that the burden to prove any charge beyond reasonable doubt is on the prosecution.
Gemzone – agree with you. 100%.
LikeLike
Kitty,
It’s a bit of a stretch to call my remark a cop-out. Bottom line, if I were on the ground and someone was beating my head against the sidewalk, I’d have no way to defend myself because I’m not strong enough to do so. And my point was simply that I’d never defend myself with a gun because I would never, ever carry one. It’s not a cop-out, it’s the truth.
As for your remarks about the jury following the letter of the law and hence not being able to convict George Zimmerman, I highly doubt if they would have found George Zimmerman if he had been black and had killed a young white boy. If that had been the case, something tells me this would have had an entirely different outcome, law or no law.
LikeLike
In my second paragraph, I intended to say . . . I highly doubt if they would have found George Zimmerman not guilty if he had been black and had killed a young white boy.
LikeLike
I wish that Mr. Obama and these croonies would have given this much attention to Benghazi and to the streets of Chicago that are like a war zone!!!
While this is tragic that a young man died, this is happening all over our country. None of us know all of the facts leading up to this on either side…the fact that Mr. Zimmerman was still at the scene when the police arrived, says alot…he was not arrested that night it was deemed self defense. Mr. Zimmerman did not fire his weapon until he was on the ground being assulted.
Now as to pack or not…I think every law abiding citizen should carry a weapon! It makes an honest man out of the would be thug!
LikeLike
Rosanne-I just read that one of jurors during the trial says she believes Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter, but there wasn’t enough evidence to convict him. She feels she owes Travon’s family an apology.
LikeLike
Yes, Anita, I saw this today. Poor thing. She was coerced into a “not guilty'” plea based on the wording of the law. That is some justice system!!
LikeLike
Rosanne-How pathetic, isn’t it? I hope some kind of justice will happen for Trayvon anyway. His family isn’t giving up yet.
LikeLike