ILNews

Attorney’s swim from Alcatraz to benefit cancer research

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An Indianapolis attorney will take on the cold, rough waters of San Francisco Bay next month, swimming from Alcatraz Island to raise money for cancer research.

Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP partner Carolyn Clay Hall will be making her second crossing from Alcatraz to San Francisco as a benefit for the American Cancer Society. She swam the bay in 2007, and on June 7 she’ll ply the nearly 1.5-mile waterway again in honor of her mother, who is battling ovarian cancer.

Hall hopes her swim raises $11,000 for research. Donations can be made on the American Cancer Society’s event website. Hall raised $10,000 in her previous swim in honor of her father, who died of cancer in 2002.

Hall’s swim will take place when the water of San Francisco Bay typically is about 57 degrees, and she said acclimating to the cold is the most challenging aspect of the swim. She swims two to three times a week with Indy Aquatic Masters and soon will do some outdoor open swims to condition for the cold-water swim.

“I think it catches the eye when somebody says they’re going to swim from Alcatraz,” Hall said. “I think people are hooked by it.”

Hall will be accompanied by several hundred swimmers making the crossing, but she said she won’t likely beat her time of 2007. “I was in a lot better shape back then,” she said. She also hadn’t had Anna, her daughter who’s now 15 months old.

Some people think swimming from Alcatraz is crazy, Hall said, but there’s also a mystique about the island that houses the famed prison known as “The Rock,” as well as legendary escapes and attempted ones.

“People wonder if there are sharks in the water,” she said. “I didn’t see any sharks.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT