Many are outraged after a viral video showed an off-duty LAPD officer firing a gun near a group of kids after the officer grabbed a 13-year-old boy by his hoodie and restraining him. The incident took place near the officer’s home in Anaheim, California.
The cellphone video shows a man in plainclothes holding a boy against his will. The boy repeatedly says, “Let me go” but the man refuses. The man, who never identifies himself as an officer is surrounded by other children as he pulls the boy down the street over lawns. Eventually, the other kids come to the aid of the boy, pushing the officer over a row of hedges. The man, who still has hold of the boy is then seen drawing a pistol from his waistband before a gunshot rings out. No one was injured in the incident.
According to one of the youths, the group was walking home from school when the incident took place. The 13 year old says it quickly escalated and turned physical when the man tackled him and choked him. While the video does not show what happened prior, it starts with the boy being restrained and asking to be let go. He then says “why are you grabbing me, I just said not to talk to a girl like that! You called her a dumb c**t.” The man replies that she shouldn’t have been on his lawn.
Anaheim police say the officer had an ongoing dispute against children who were walking on his lawn. Both the 13-year-old boy and his 15-year-old brother were arrested. The off-duty officer, who has not been identified, was questioned by Anaheim police and released.
Overnight, around 300 protesters gathered near the officer’s home, before marching through Anaheim’s streets and blocking intersections. Some protesters shouted “hands up, don’t shoot” and “no justice, no peace.” Some demonstrators threw rocks and kicked police cars, while others broke windows or residences and cars, according to the LA Times.
There was also a small group of protestors who lingered around the officer’s home chanting “Don’t shoot the children.” The officer’s home and vehicle were vandalized before riot police arrived to protect the officer’s home. Twenty-four people were arrested on misdemeanor charges of failure to disperse.
The LAPD says the officer is on paid administrative leave while the department evaluates if his “use of deadly force complied with LAPD’s policies and procedures.” Anaheim police say they are reviewing other videos of the altercation to get a clearer picture of what happened.
Anaheim mayor Tom Tait and Police Chief Raul Quezada both said they were thankful no one was wounded when the officer fired a handgun into the ground. They also both said they are disturbed by video that shows an off-duty Los Angeles police officer firing his gun during a confrontation with a teenager.
Police Chief Quezada told reporters “As a father and as a police chief, I too am disturbed by what I saw on the videos that were posted on the Internet,” He said he hopes a criminal investigation into the matter, which involved several teens and an off-duty Los Angeles police officer who lives in Anaheim, will be completed within two weeks. No one has been formally charged in the incident.
Read more
In northern Afghanistan, six Red Cross workers were killed and two others were missing on Wednesday after an attack. The Taliban quickly denied any involvement in the attack. The governor of Jowzjan Province, Lutfullah Azizi, blamed affiliates of the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, for the attack.
Mr. Azizi said that the Red Cross had begun a mission to distribute livestock material in the Qush Tepah area of Jowzjan Province, where the attack happened, but that its work was suspended by recent avalanches. When workers went to resume giving out aid, they were targeted.
“They were a team of eight people in three vehicles, including three drivers and five staff,” Mr. Azizi said. “Islamic State attacked the convoy, killed the three drivers and three staff members on the spot and took two staff members with them.”
The plan was for the Red Cross staff to help distribute the 1,000 tons of feed, which is critical for farmers because there is nowhere for animals to graze in the winter months. Before the vehicles got to the distribution point, they were ambushed by armed men. The panic button sent an alert to Red Cross offices in Kabul, but efforts to reach the staffers by satellite phone and other means failed. “We couldn’t get hold of them,” says Thomas Glass, head of communications for the International Committee of the Red Cross in Afghanistan. The Red Cross is “desperately” searching for the two missing field staff members.
Glass stated that the Red Cross has 30 years of continuous presence in Afghanistan and they are well-known and respected for their work within the communities they serve. The vehicles are clearly marked so the ambush has all the signs of a deliberate attack. Red Cross workers being attacked in Afghanistan is nothing new but the loss of 6 lives at one time seems like another level of violence.
In Afghanistan, the Red Cross helps with many efforts for the communities such as supporting health care, anti-poverty work and sanitation efforts. The Red Cross issued a statement that activities are suspended until Tuesday, possibly longer. Certain activities will continue, such as the treatment of patients at medical facilities will continue but any movement in the field, including the transfer of war-wounded to hospitals, has been put on hold.
Qush Tepah is about 37 miles from the provincial capital and is rife with militant groups, including five Islamic State factions with an estimated 200 fighters. A spokesman for the northern police zone said there were about 600 foreign fighters in five Northern provinces.
In recent weeks, officials in northern Afghanistan had expressed concern about an increase in foreign fighters there, many of them suspected of affiliation with the Islamic State. Amnesty International condemned the attack and noted that violence has intensified recently in Afghanistan. The work of humanitarian workers and journalists has become increasingly dangerous as there has been an increase of deliberate attacks on aid workers and journalists.
Read more
Immediately after swearing in Sessions as attorney general, President Trump signed three new executive orders addressing crime and immigration. One executive order seeks to increase penalties on those found guilty of assaulting police officers. A second order directs law enforcement agencies to increase intelligence sharing while going after drug cartels. A third order directs Attorney General Sessions to prioritize fighting “illegal immigration” alongside drug trafficking and violent crime.
President Trump also green-lighted construction of a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico, a proposal he repeatedly mentioned while campaigning. The wall is just one component of sweeping action Trump took to clamp down on immigration to the U.S. “Building this barrier is more than just a campaign promise, it is a common-sense first step to securing our border. This will stem the flow of drugs, crime, and illegal immigration into the United States. And yes, one way or another, as the President has said, Mexico will pay for it,” White House spokesman Sean Spicer said.
Other actions recently taken by President Trump include:
- Ending federal grant funding to sanctuary cities and states, which opt out of reporting undocumented immigrants.
- Ordering the Department of Homeland Security to allocate funds or establish contracts for the construction or operation of detention facilities.
- Ending the policy known as “catch and release,” under which some immigrants are released from detention while they await a hearing with an immigration judge.
- Prioritizing the deportation of immigrants who have committed crimes.
During the White House press briefing on Wednesday, Spicer reiterated earlier statements that the President’s priority would be on criminals. “His priorities, first and foremost, are the people in this country that seek to do us harm,” he said.
Reactions to the immigration actions were swift from eight immigration and refugee-rights groups who joined a conference call to denounce the new orders. They argue that the orders make the U.S. less safe and tear apart families and communities across the country. Advocates said the executive orders are “anti-immigrant, anti-refugee and anti-religious freedom”. None of the advocacy organizations that were on the call had been briefed or received any guidance from the Trump Administration on the orders and future immigration plans.
Advocacy groups are preparing to take legal action and provide lawyers to protect people who are concerned about pending visa applications, hate crimes and continued confusion at the U.S. border. Many mayors of U.S. cities who have adopted sanctuary policies have said they are ready and willing to push back on Trump’s funding plans.
Read more
The Army Corps of Engineers appears ready to approve the final permit required to build the $3.8 billion Dakota Access pipeline. The Dakota Access project has faced months of resistance from hundreds of indigenous nations and non-Native allies. Policing the protests in North Dakota has cost the taxpayers over 22 million dollars.
North Dakota Senator John Hoeven said that acting Secretary of the Army Robert Speer has directed the Army Corps to issue the easement for Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind the pipeline. The easement allows the company to drill underneath the Missouri River.
Energy Transfer Partners is poised to begin drilling under Lake Oahe as soon as approval is given. Workers have drilled entry and exit holes for the crossing and oil has been put in the pipeline leading up to the lake in anticipation of finishing the project. CEO Kelcy Warren has said the company should be able to finish the project in about three months once the permit is granted.
The 1,200-mile pipeline would carry North Dakota oil through the Dakotas and Iowa to a shipping point in Illinois. Dallas-based developer Energy Transfer Partners had hoped to have the pipeline operating by the end of 2016, but construction has been stalled while the Corps and the company battled in court over the crossing.
An assessment conducted last year determined the crossing would not have a significant impact on the environment. However, on Dec. 4th, then-Assistant Army Secretary for Civil Works Jo-Ellen Darcy declined to issue permission for the crossing, saying a broader environmental study was warranted. The Corps launched a study of the crossing on Jan. 18th. President Donald Trump signed an executive action Jan. 24 telling the Corps to quickly reconsider Darcy’s decision and shortly after court documents were filed that include a proposed Federal Register notice terminating the study.
The Corps has notified the remaining protesters that the government-owned land will be closed Feb. 22nd 2017. The Standing Rock Sioux and supporters fear a pipeline spill could contaminate the river, which serves as a drinking water source for millions.
Water protectors say that if the easement is granted, the government would be illegally circumventing the process of an environmental impact statement, which was ordered in December under President Obama’s administration. Members of the resistance camp Sacred Stone on the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota have called for water protectors to come to support the resistance to the Dakota Access pipeline.
Read more
President Trump has imposed a controversial 90-day ban on travelers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. On January 27th, Trump signed the order banning travel from the seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days and suspending all refugee admission for 120 days. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) leadership saw the final details shortly before the order was finalized.
The result was widespread confusion across the country on Saturday as airports struggled to adjust to the new directives. Stories of families separated or detained for hours starting circulating news outlets.The policy team at the White House developed the executive order on refugees and visas and avoided the traditional inter-agency process that allowed the Justice Department and homeland security agencies to provide operational guidance.
DHS arrived at the legal interpretation that the executive order restrictions did not apply to people with lawful permanent residence, referred to as green card holders. The White House overruled that guidance overnight and decided that on a case by case basis, DHS could allow green card holders to enter the US. The Department of Homeland Security decided that green card holders would be allowed to board international flights but would be considered on a case-by-case basis after passing a secondary screening.
Acting Attorney General Sally Yates announced the Justice Department would not defend Trump’s executive order temporarily banning all refugees, as well as all citizens, from the seven Muslim-majority nations. Just hours after her announcement, President Trump fired her. Yates had served in the Justice Department for 27 years and Trump had asked her to serve as acting attorney general until the Senate confirmed Sen. Jeff Sessions.
Yates is not the only one to publicly disagree with the executive order. More than 200 State Department officials and diplomats have signed on to drafts of a dissent memo that condemns Trump’s executive order. Executives at a growing number of corporations have spoken out against Trump’s immigration ban, including Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, Tesla, Airbnb, Ford and Goldman Sachs. World-wide protests has erupted across the globe as well.
Then, Federal Judge James Robart, who presides in Seattle, halted the enforcement of Trump’s order Friday night, effective nationwide. Ruling in a lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of Washington state and Minnesota who sought to stop the order, he said the states “have met their burden of demonstrating that they face immediate and irreparable injury as a result of the signing and implementation of the Executive Order. ” He said the order adversely affects residents in areas of education, employment, education and freedom to travel.
The Department of Homeland Security announced it has suspended all actions to implement the immigration order and will resume standard inspections of travelers as it did prior to the signing of the travel ban. They said the Justice Department — which is expected to file an emergency motion to stop the order — needed to challenge the ruling “at the earliest possible time.”
Read more
Police have arrested a gunman charged with opening fire at the Islamic Cultural Centre of Quebec City during evening prayers. Canadian university student Alexandre Bissonnette, 27, has been charged with 6 counts of murder and five counts of attempted murder in the shooting that left six people dead and 19 wounded.
Witnesses described a gunman dressed in black, opening fire indiscriminately with semi-automatic weapons. More than 50 people were at the Quebec Islamic Cultural Centre when the shooting began. All the shooting victims were men and those killed ranged in age from 39 to 60. Of the four victims who remained hospitalized, two were in critical condition, authorities said.
Among the six men killed were a butcher, a university professor, a pharmacist and an accountant, according to police. The government of Guinea said in a statement that two of its citizens were among those killed in the mosque attack.
The suspect was arrested in his car on a bridge near d’Orleans, after he called 911 to say he wanted to cooperate with police. Authorities initially named two suspects, but later said the other man taken into custody was a witness to the attack and was released. Officials said they did not believe there were others involved. Police did not give a motive for the attack.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard both characterized the attack as an act of terrorism, which came amid strong criticism around the world over Trump’s temporary travel ban for people from seven Muslim countries. Shortly after Trump’s executive order was issued, Prime Minister Trudeau announced that Canada would welcome refugees banned from entering the United States.
Federal Safety Minister Ralph Goodale told reporters in Ottawa there was no change to “the national terrorism threat level” from medium because “there is no information known to the government of Canada that would lead to a change at this time.”
According to media outlets, Bissonnette was known for far-right, nationalist views and his support of the French rightist party led by Marine Le Pen. The suspect has expressed support for Le Pen and U.S. President Donald Trump on his Facebook page. He was known to those who monitor extremist groups in Quebec, said François Deschamps, an official with a refugee advocacy group.
Bissonnette made a brief appearance in court under tight security wearing a white prison garment. Prosecutors said they do not have all the evidence yet. Bissonnette is set to appear again on Feb. 21. No charge was read in court and Bissonnette did not enter a plea.
The attack was a shock to the community of Quebec City, a city of just over 500,000 which reported just two murders in all of 2015. Incidents of Islamophobia have increased in Quebec in recent years. The face-covering, or niqab, became an issue in the 2015 Canadian federal election, especially in Quebec, where the majority of the population supported a ban on it at citizenship ceremonies.
Read more
New York City taxpayers will pay $75 million to settle a class action lawsuit against the New York Police Department over its issuing of nearly 1 million legally baseless criminal summonses over several years because they were under pressure to meet quotas. The summonses were later dismissed for lack of evidence. The settlement must be approved by U.S. District Judge Robert W. Sweet.
The suit was filed in a federal court in 2010 on behalf of people who were hit with 900,000 court summonses that were later dismissed because of legal deficiencies. The settlement would allow people issued court summonses for offenses such as trespassing, disorderly conduct and urinating in public to receive a maximum of $150 per person per incident for their trouble.
The lawsuit argued police were routinely ordered to issue summonses “regardless of whether any crime or violation” had occurred to meet quotas. It cited claims by two whistleblower officers who said they were forced into quotas by precinct superiors. The quota allegations were denied in the settlement agreement.
Under the agreement, the city said the NYPD must update and expand training and guidance reiterating to officers and their superiors that quotas are not allowed, and officers must not be mandated to make a particular number of summonses, street stops or arrests.
A total of $56.6 million would be set aside, and individual payments could end up lower if more claims are made. Any funds not paid go back to the city, which is also paying $18.5 million in legal fees. Possible class members would be notified through social media and other advertisements.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs called it the largest false-arrest class-action lawsuit in city history. The 2010 lawsuit includes summonses filed from 2007 through at least 2015. About one-quarter of the summonses issued during that time frame were dismissed for legal insufficiency, according to data in the lawsuit. Legal insufficiency is not necessarily a lack of evidence but may be that an officer wasn’t clear enough in explaining why someone was ticketed.
The class action suit came amid a growing outcry over the NYPD’s encounters with minorities. The lead plaintiff in the case, Sharif Stinson, said he was stopped twice outside his aunt’s Bronx building in 2010 when he was 19 and was given disorderly conduct summonses by officers who said he used obscene language. The officers didn’t specify what the language or behavior was, and the tickets were dismissed.
Read more
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has decided to drop a series of lawsuits to buy plots of lands in Hawaii after public backlash. Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan purchased the 700-acre waterfront estate on Kauai for $100 million in 2014. They filed a series of eight lawsuits to buy out several hundred people’s stake of 13 plots on eight acres partitioned during the 1850s.
Many of the plots of land involved in the suits are “kuleana lands” which were granted to native Hawaiian tenant farmers between 1850 and 1855 and hold special rights including access, agricultural uses, gathering, water and fishing rights.
The suit was met with heavy criticism by some Hawaiians including hundreds who planned to protest outside Zuckerberg’s estate. The suits would have forced hundreds of residents, including Native families, off their land in order to make his Hawaiian beachfront property as private as possible.
He initially defended the move, saying the purpose of the quiet title action was to identify property owners who were unaware of their stake in the land. “Quiet title actions are the standard and prescribed process to identify all potential co-owners, determine ownership, and ensure that, if there are other co-owners, each receives appropriate value for their ownership share,” Zuckerberg’s lawyer, Keoni Schultz, said earlier in January.
Zuckerberg published a letter in the local Hawaiian newspaper The Garden Island saying it was clear the decision to file the suits over his ownership of the beachfront property on the island of Kauai was a mistake. Zuckerberg said he initially misunderstood the quiet title process and hoped to work with the community to find a better solution.
“To find a better path forward, we are dropping our quiet title actions and will work together with the community on a new approach,” he said. “We understand that for native Hawaiians, kuleana are sacred and the quiet title process can be difficult. We want to make this right, talk with the community, and find a better approach.”
“Upon reflection, I regret that I did not take the time to fully understand the quiet title process and its history before we moved ahead. Now that I understand the issues better, it’s clear we made a mistake,” he said. “The right path is to sit down and discuss how to best move forward. We will continue to speak with community leaders that represent different groups, including native Hawaiians and environmentalists, to find the best path.”
In June 2016, Zuckerberg faced criticism for building a 6 foot stone wall enclosing his 700 acre property. Many residents said it blocked breezes and obstructed ocean views. Others argued that while it is his right to build on his property-it did not feel very neighborly.
Read more
Mexican drug lord Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán pled not guilty in a U.S. federal court in New York City. His attorneys had fought his extradition in part by citing discrimination against Mexicans. His court appearance came just one day after his extradition from Mexico and he is being held without bail. Guzman, 59, arrived at Long Island’s MacArthur Airport Thursday night after being taken from prison in the city of Juarez, in the northern state of Chihuahua, where his Sinaloa cartel rules.
He is accused of running the world’s largest drug-trafficking organization. There are 17 criminal charges against him, carrying a minimum sentence of life behind bars. Guzman is accused of money laundering, drug trafficking, kidnapping and murder in several US cities, including Chicago, Miami and New York. Charged in a total of six U.S. jurisdictions, Guzman will faced his first set of charges in Brooklyn on a combined indictment from New York and Florida.
While leading the Sinaloa cartel, Guzman is believed to have been running the world’s largest transnational cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine smuggling operation. More than 100,000 people have been killed during a decade-long drug war in Mexico. A U.S. attorney says the government is seeking a $14 billion forfeiture order as part of its prosecution of the notorious Mexican drug kingpin.
According to his indictment and court filings, Guzman grew and sold poppies for heroin as a young boy. His drug trafficking career that began in the 1980s and he came to dominate Mexican smugglers by the speed with which he was able to move drugs into the United States.
After partnering with Colombian producers, they shared in profits of U.S. distribution markets, moving cocaine and other drugs through tunnels under the U.S. border as well as planes, yachts and even a submarine, employing a crew of violent hit men known as“sicarios” and corrupting Mexican officials.
The indictment charges Guzman with running the massive drug trafficking operation that laundered billions of dollars and oversaw murders and kidnappings. Prosecutors agreed to not seek the death penalty as a condition of the extradition of Guzman, who’s the convicted leader of the Sinaloa cartel.
Guzman had maintained control and expanded his drug trafficking empire through two prison terms in Mexico. He has escaped twice from a maximum security prison in Mexico, once in a laundry cart and a second time in 2015, through a mile-long tunnel dug into the shower in his cell. He was captured a year ago, just six months after his last escape. Mexican officials say a secret interview with US actor Sean Penn helped locate the world’s most wanted drug baron. US officials have refused to say where El Chapo will be held while awaiting trial, but they vowed to prevent any further escapes.
US attorney for New York’s Eastern District, Robert Capers, told reporters the trial will likely be long and that more than 40 witnesses were ready to testify. US prosecutors assured Mexican officials that El Chapo would not be executed in order to secure his extradition, Capers said. Mexico opposes capital punishment. “Guzman and the Sinaloa cartel had a veritable army, ready to war with competitors and anyone Guzman deemed to be a traitor,” US prosecutors said. He was known to carry a gold-plated AK-47 rifle.
Read more
The Justice Department have announced that Chicago police officers routinely violate civil rights, target communities of color with excessive force and maintain a “code of silence” to hinder investigations into abuses. After a 13 month investigation, the Department of Justice has concluded that there is reasonable cause to believe that the Chicago Police Department engages in a pattern or practice of use of excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.
The investigation began in December 2015 after the release of a video showing the death of 17-year-old African American Laquan McDonald, who was shot 16 times by white police officer Jason Van Dyke. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel agreed in principle to negotiate a consent decree for a federal monitor to oversee the Chicago Police Department.
The Chicago Police Department has a legacy of corruption and abuse. The over 161 page report came to light as the department grapples with skyrocketing violence in Chicago, where murders are at a 20-year high, and a deep lack of trust among the city’s residents.
The report cited unchecked aggressions such as an officer pointing a gun at teenagers on bicycles suspected of trespassing; officers using a Taser on an unarmed, naked 65-year-old woman with mental illness; officers purposely dropping off young gang members in rival territory. The report stated that after officers used excessive force, their actions were practically condoned by supervisors, who rarely questioned their behavior. One commander interviewed by the Justice Department said that he could not recall ever suggesting that officers’ use of force be investigated further.
Chicago is among nearly two dozen cities — including Cleveland; Ferguson, Mo.; and Seattle — where the Justice Department has pushed for wholesale changes to police practices.
Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Mayor Emanuel presented the report at the federal courthouse in downtown Chicago. They laid out the steps the city had committed to take to remedy the problems. Lynch said the Justice Department had reviewed thousands of documents, conducted extensive interviews, and discovered widespread evidence that the Police Department was sorely in need of reform. It does not train officers properly, fails to properly collect and analyze data, and has little support from the community, the report said.
The report described a broad lack of oversight within the department. “We found that officers engage in tactically unsound and unnecessary foot pursuits, and that these foot pursuits too often end with officers unreasonably shooting someone — including unarmed individuals,” the report said. “We found that officers shoot at vehicles without justification and in contradiction to C.P.D. policy. We found further that officers exhibit poor discipline when discharging their weapons and engage in tactics that endanger themselves and public safety, including failing to await backup when they safely could and should; using unsound tactics in approaching vehicles; and using their own vehicles in a manner that is dangerous.”
Read more
