You are peacefully lying on your back with both of your arms in the air, pleading with police not to shoot you. Instead of letting you walk away unharmed, a police officer shoots you in the leg. What would be your next plan of action? File a lawsuit against the officer?

Well, that’s the latest in the incident with Charles Kinsey, a 47-year-old behavioral therapist from North Miami, Florida,  who was shot in the leg by police while trying to help his autistic patient. In case you missed it, check out Law Street’s coverage of the incident here.

Kinsey filed a federal lawsuit against North Miami police Officer Jonathan Aledda, arguing that Aledda and other officers wrongfully arrested him and used excessive force. In the lawsuit, it also says that Aledda did not help stop the bleeding after he shot Kinsey, even after officers figured out there was no weapon at the scene. Because of the physical, emotional, and mental trauma the incident caused, Kinsey and his lawyer are demanding a jury trial and unstated monetary damages. 

After he was shot, Kinsey was handcuffed and lay bleeding in the middle of the street, according to the lawsuit. It also alleges that when North Miami officers arrived at the scene, they immediately grabbed assault rifles from their cars and approached in a “military-style formation.”

Kinsey’s attorney, Hilton Napoleon, filed the lawsuit and in it, said,“by failing to render aid, Officer Aledda allowed Mr. Kinsey to unnecessarily bleed out on the ground for a significant period of time, which further exasperated Mr. Kinsey’s recovery time for his injuries.” 

Aledda has been placed on paid administrative leave.

The autistic man Kinsey was looking after, Arnaldo Eliud Rios, 23, has been at the psychiatric ward of a Miami hospital and was traumatized by the event, said his mother, Gladys Soto. Rios and Kinsey met at the hospital last week for the first time since the shooting.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Behavioral Therapist Shot by North Miami Police Officer Files Federal Lawsuit appeared first on Law Street.

Dylann Roof is accused of killing nine people at a Charleston, South Carolina church last summer, and was charged with 33 federal offenses and received the death penalty. On Monday, Roof’s defense attorneys filed a legal challenge to the capital punishment, arguing that the death penalty is unconstitutional.

#DylannRoof’s federal attorneys try to throw out death penalty as ‘unconstitutional’: https://t.co/zNPsJJp1Hy pic.twitter.com/rkFDTu95r7

— The Root (@TheRoot) August 2, 2016

In a 30-plus page motion, his defense team wrote, “this Court should rule that the federal death penalty constitutes a legally prohibited, arbitrary, cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by both the Fifth and Eighth Amendments.” The motion went on to say, “The facts of this case are indisputably grave. But if, as we contend here, the FDPA [Federal Death Penalty Act] is unconstitutional, no one can be lawfully sentenced to death or executed under it, no matter what his crimes.”

If federal prosecutors drop the pursuit of the death penalty, Roof’s lawyers say they will drop the challenge. Why the complication? The challenge comes from the prosecution’s unwillingness to accept Roof’s guilty pleas and multiple life sentences without parole.

Roof, a white male who is now 22-years-old, was indicted on 33 counts of federal hate crimes and firearm charges last summer. He is accused of killing nine black worshippers at a Bible study in the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina.

The Justice Department is strongly pursuing the death penalty because Roof targeted his victims on the basis of race and religion.

“The nature of the alleged crime and the resulting harm compelled this decision,” Attorney General Loretta Lynch said in May about the decision to pursue the death penalty. A month after the shooting in July 2015, she said, “To carry out these twin goals of fanning racial flames and exacting revenge, Roof further decided to seek out and murder African Americans because of their race.” She went on to say, “An essential element of his plan, however, was to find his victims inside of a church, specifically an African-American church, to ensure the greatest notoriety and attention to his actions.”

The judge who is presiding over the case, Richard Gergel, did not immediately rule out the filing to challenge the death penalty. However, Twitter users immediately reacted.

#DylannRoof should absolutely be given the death penalty when found guilty. If you MURDER people, you have sacrificed your own right to live

— Josh Nelson (@RoarFromIA) August 2, 2016

 

Foreign terrorists don’t get to challenge a death penalty, why should domestic terrorists? #DylannRoof #KillDylannRoof

— TW: White female. (@karmapolitical) August 2, 2016

#KorrynGaines & #DylannRoof news this AM. IF you’re going to kill the woman who might have shot someone, then kill the man who murdered 9.

— Austin Saunders (@Widlcat77) August 2, 2016

Yeah, #DylannRoof doesn’t deserve the death penalty. They should randomly go into his cell & violently murder him. That would be “fair”.

— Faustslaughter (@Faustslaughter) August 2, 2016

Roof’s federal trial is set for November 7 in U.S. District Court. A murder trial in South Carolina state court is scheduled for January.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Dylann Roof’s Lawyers Seek Life Sentence Over Death Penalty appeared first on Law Street.

For the first time in nearly two decades, the state of Alabama might implement a lottery system in order to pay for basic services that it currently cannot afford.

In a video released yesterday, Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley announced, “the state of Alabama has not and cannot at this time pay for the most basic services that we must provide to our people.”

He continued, “the time has come for us to find a permanent solution. This solution will provide funding that we can count on year after year without ever having to raise your taxes or put one more Band-Aid on our state’s money problems.”

BREAKING:We need your help solving our funding crisis.I’m giving you the opportunity to vote on a Statewide Lottery. https://t.co/BLzE3bOXLP

— Gov. Robert Bentley (@GovernorBentley) July 27, 2016

The lottery could bring in $225 million annually, a steady revenue that would help alleviate the state’s reliance on borrowing money and using one-time money to fill the gap in Alabama’s dismal finances. Bentley said the revenue would be applied to General Fund programs like services for law enforcement, the mentally ill, children, and “those in the most need.”

State lawmakers have tried cutting “wasteful” spending, shifting the management of Medicaid to the private sector, and borrowing money, and a proposed, but rejected, tax plan–but those efforts have still not been enough to fix the financial problem.

Bentley said he wants the voters to decide whether or not a lottery should be implemented to fix Alabama’s financial situation, which means the issue would appear on the Nov. 8 ballot. However, in order for that to happen, the Legislature would have to approve the amendment by Aug. 24 with a three-fifths vote in both the House and Senate.

With less than a month until the date the amendment would have to be approved by, it doesn’t seem like the Alabama governor has made any plans to get the ball rolling. Though he just made the video announcement Wednesday, he has not provided any other details on a special session which would have to be called in order to create the amendment.

State representatives and senators from Alabama took to the proposal differently. Rep. John Knight (D-Montgomery) chairman of the Alabama House Black Caucus, said he was disturbed that Bentley had not talked about the lottery proposal with him or anyone in the Caucus.

“It seems like everything that is being done now is being done behind closed doors,” Knight said.

Acting House Speaker Victor Gaston (R-Mobile) shared those sentiments, saying in a statement, “the governor has not outlined his plan to legislators in any detail, nor, to my knowledge, has he even set a concrete start date for the special session, so it is difficult to comment with so little information at hand.” He continued, “I hope that the governor reaches out to lawmakers over the next several weeks in order to seek their input on any lottery proposal that comes forward and to do the prep work that is necessary for any special session to be successful.”

Others, like Rep. Craig Ford, (D-Gadsden), leader of the Democratic minority in the Alabama House of Representatives, do not believe Bentley’s plan will work.

“A lottery will do nothing for this year’s Medicaid shortfall, and at best will be nothing more than a band aid for the General Fund that will leave us right back where we are now in just a few years,” he said in a statement. “The lottery is a one-shot deal, and a lottery for the General Fund will become, as it has in other states, a victim to legislative shell games; it will become nothing more than a slush fund for legislators.”

.@RepCraigFord says his proposed lottery must fund scholarships, and will not save the state’s budgets: https://t.co/yxGV9vUygK #alpolitics

— AL Reporter (@ALReporter) July 27, 2016

Sen. Quinton Ross (D-Montgomery), minority leader in the Alabama Senate, agrees with Bentley’s lottery proposal.

“These gaming dollars can provide stability and long-term economic streams for many of our General Fund and Education Trust Fund needs.”

Until Bentley schedules a special session, it’s unclear whether or not the lottery will come to the Crimson Tide state.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Could a Lottery Save Alabama’s Lack of State Funding? appeared first on Law Street.

If you’re caught using too much water in Prince Albert, Canada, you could be fined up to $1,000. Need to get your car washed or go to the laundry mat? You’re out of luck, they’re all closed. Prince Albert and the surrounding communities in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan are under a state of emergency that was declared Monday following an oil spill on the North Saskatchewan River, the area’s main water source.

Prince Albert city council has declared a local state of emergency due to #huskyoilspill. https://t.co/T8SuMIWD9r pic.twitter.com/mlEMj3sT7T

— 350 Canada (@350Canada) July 26, 2016

The city is coping with the disastrous oil spill by rolling out an emergency waterline that will connect the South Saskatchewan River, the next biggest water source, to Prince Albert and the other communities who are under strict water restrictions. The temporary waterline will extend a little over 18 miles, and will feed clean water into Prince Albert’s water plant by Tuesday evening. On Monday, Mayor Greg Dionne said the waterline was about halfway complete.

“Once we get the [waterline] up and running we’ll be in a different situation,” Dionne said. “There’s enough water delivered on that line to get our plant fully up to capacity and that’s key, because we’ll be able to put everyone back in business.”

So just how bad was the oil spill? About 66,000 gallons of heavy oil and natural gas, enough oil to fill about a tenth of an Olympic-size swimming pool, spilled into the North Saskatchewan River. But that figure is nothing compared to the 2010 BP oil spill where 200 million gallons of oil spilled into the Gulf Coast, enough oil to fill 302 Olympic-size swimming pools.

However, the amount is still enough to cause headaches among city officials who are already expecting complications and problems. Depending on how well Prince Albert residents save water, the city’s reservoir could last anywhere between 48 hours and a week. The city is depending on that reserve of water until the 18-mile temporary waterline is completed. But, it will not be all smooth sailing when the waterline is completed. At about every mile of the waterline, there will be a pump in order to facilitate water flow from the source to Prince Albert. In case there is a problem with that, the city is already exploring secondary water supply options like ponds from private land owners and using the city’s retention ponds.

Globs of oil floating down #NorthSaskRiver #huskyenergy #oilspill #PrinceAlbert #Saskatchewan #WaterIsLife #water pic.twitter.com/YG5RQDTeLn

— Shelley Essaunce (@shelleyshell4) July 26, 2016

It’s unclear when Prince Albert will rely on its primary water source, according to Dionne.

“We could have it up as long as two months. It all depends on the river, how much oil has sunk in the river, where is it pooled, because at the end of the day, we can’t start a water plant up if there’s still pools of oil out there that can damage our plant.”

Authorities have cleaned up about 40 percent of the spill as of Tuesday afternoon. Husky Energy, the company responsible for the spill, and the Canadian government teamed up to create booms to catch more of the leakage. Jeff Da Silva, manager of public works with the city, said consultants have been hired to test the water in the river and the water coming out of the water treatment plant to see if any hydrocarbons are present.

So just how many people are impacted by the spill? Prince Albert has about 35,000 residents, and in the surrounding communities there are about 1,200 rural properties that currently have no water because of the shutdown. A representative from Husky Energy, Al Pate, said the company would try and do everything they could for those affected.

“We’re deeply sorry this has happened,” Pate said. “We accept full responsibility for the event and the cleanup and we will make things right.”

However, since the oil spill happened on Thursday, Husky Energy has yet to send a representative to Prince Albert. But, the CEO of Husky has assured the mayor of Prince Albert that the company will cover all costs incurred by the city because of the spill.

“This waterline alone is costing over $1 million,” Dionne said. “Husky have given us assurances that they’re going to make us whole and that they’re going to fix whatever has to be fixed, and I take them for their word.”

Pate said the cause of the oil leak is unknown, and it may take weeks or even months to understand the causes.

When will we learn?? We continue to live with zero responsibility as if there are no consequences.#huskyoilspill #environmentaljustice

— Khaled خالد (@KhaledAlwaleed) July 26, 2016

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post State of Emergency Declared In Canadian Town Due to Oil Spill appeared first on Law Street.

Hillary Clinton announced her running mate on Friday, going with a safe candidate who is seasoned with experience in almost every level of government and thankfully lacks a scandalous background. Despite the fact that Tim Kaine is a white, Catholic male and an insider to politics, he can do a few things that the average politician cannot: he officiates weddings, plays the harmonica, and speaks fluent Spanish.

Kaine started his political career as a city councilman in Richmond, Virginia, where he later served as mayor. He was elected Governor of Virginia in 2006, and became a senator in 2012. He also served as chairman of the Democratic National Convention during the first years of the Obama administration. He currently serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Armed Services Committee.

Kaine has been in politics for 22 years and knows a thing or two about elections, except for one thing: losing. Kaine has never lost an election during his tenure in government. Another fun fact about the next possible vice president? He is the first senator to give an entire speech on the Senate floor in a language other than English (he recited a speech entirely in Spanish in 2013).

Critics have called Kaine boring, but maybe that’s what Clinton needs to get her the presidency in November. On the big issues dominating this election, where does he stand?

Gun Control

Kaine has a personal connection with the push for stricter gun laws— he was the governor of Virginia when the Virginia Tech shooting happened, and at the time, it was the most deadly mass shooting in history. He described it as the worst day of his life:

That was the worst day of my life, and it will always be the worst day of my life — comforting the families of the victims, talking to the first responders who went into a classroom where bodies littered the floor and who heard in the pockets of deceased students and professors cell phones ringing as parents who had seen it on the news were calling their kids, just knowing they were at Virginia Tech to ask them if they were all right — calls that would never be answered.

Although a proponent of the second amendment and a gun owner himself, Kaine said he “supports common sense legislation,” and would like to see expanded background checks, restrictions on assault-style weapons, and expansion for mental health services, according to a statement on his website.

“Hillary and I will not rest…until we get universal background checks and close loopholes.” —@TimKaine on preventing gun violence

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) July 23, 2016

Women’s Reproductive Rights

Kaine is a pretty fervent Catholic, but when it comes to abortion rights, he believes it’s a personal matter, not a political one. He has an impressive 100 percent pro-choice voting record on abortion issues in the Senate, which garners respect from groups like Planned Parenthood and National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws.

Although Kaine does not personally agree with abortions, he said, “I deeply believe, and not just as a matter of politics, but even as a matter of morality, that matters about reproduction and intimacy and relationships and contraception are in the personal realm. They’re moral decisions for individuals to make for themselves. And the last thing we need is government intruding into those personal decisions.”

In August 2015 he voted against defunding Planned Parenthood, saying that for many women, “Planned Parenthood health centers are their only source of high quality health care.”

Planned Parenthood provides many critical, preventative services. Here’s just some #StandWithPP pic.twitter.com/TmPRd7GJ1X

— Senator Tim Kaine (@timkaine) December 2, 2015

Education 

Kaine was critical of No Child Left Behind from the get-go. When he was governor of Virginia in 2006, he said the education act was “wreaking havoc on local school districts.” He has scathed NCLB for putting so much pressure and focus on standardized testing.

The new act that replaced NCLB in December 2015, Every Child Succeeds, has parts that Kaine wrote that focused on promoting career and technical education.

Authorization of Military Force

Kaine is the father of a Marine, so creating policy that recognizes that soldiers put their lives at risk in order to protect national security is important to him. That’s why he has pushed for the Obama administration to get re-authorization from Congress in order to fight terrorist groups like ISIS. In September 2014, Kaine called on President Obama to seek authorization on the Senate floor:

During a time of war, we ask our troops to give their best even to the point of sacrificing their own lives. When compared against that, how much of a sacrifice is it for a President to engage in a possibly contentious debate with Congress about whether military action is a good idea? How much of a sacrifice is it for a member of Congress to debate and vote about whether military action is a good idea? While Congressional members face the political costs of debate on military action, our service members bear the human costs of those decisions. And if we choose to avoid debate, avoid accountability, avoid a hard decision how can we demand that our military willingly sacrifice their very lives?

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Where Does Tim Kaine Stand on the Issues? appeared first on Law Street.

Thursday night in Nice, France, 84 people went to go celebrate Bastille Day and watch the fireworks, but their night ended in tragic death, as the country experienced its third major terror attack in 19 months. More than 200 others were injured–some critically–as a result of Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, 31, the man who is believed to be responsible for driving a large commercial truck over a mile-long stretch along a crowded boulevard, brutally mowing down those in his path.

French officers finally shot and killed Bouhlel outside the Hyatt hotel and casino. Prime Minister Manuel Valls addressed the attack Friday morning after a cabinet meeting. “We will not give in to the terrorist threat. The times have changed, and France is going to have to live with terrorism.”

President François Hollande has extended France’s state of emergency for another three months. Originally, the state of emergency was supposed to be over at the end of the month in the wake of the attacks in and around Paris Nov. 13. He has also called for three days of mourning beginning Saturday, where the flags will fly at half staff. Hollande said he in no way doubts that the attack had ties to terror.

“We have an enemy who is going to continue to strike all the people, all the countries who have freedom as a fundamental value,” Hollande said. “France is afflicted, but she is strong, and she will always be stronger than the fanatics who want to strike her.”

INTERPOL Incident Response Team being deployed to #Nice to provide disaster victim identification assistance

— INTERPOL (@INTERPOL_HQ) July 15, 2016

Heroic motorcyclist loses life in attempt to stop #NiceAttack https://t.co/42bPpUgBSj pic.twitter.com/m7GQvrnMjs

— RT (@RT_com) July 15, 2016

Another horrific attack, this time in Nice, France. Many dead and injured. When will we learn? It is only getting worse.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 14, 2016

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Nice Attack: 84 Dead From Deadly Truck Rampage appeared first on Law Street.

“Deflategate” is easily one of the biggest scandals to ever rock the NFL, continuously generating headlines a year and a half later. The intricacies of the controversy have become so complex, that coming this fall the University of New Hampshire’s Law School will offer a class that focuses specifically on the scandal. A legal expert for Sports Illustrated and a nationally prominent UNH law faculty professor, Michael McCann, will lead the course.

According to the class description,

The nationally publicized “Deflategate” case illustrates the power struggle that results when sports and law collide. [The course] will introduce [students] to the role the legal system plays in sports, relevant practices and applications in the field, and the journalistic methods used to fuel a scandal that has dominated the professional sports landscape since January of 2015.

It’s been 544 days since the scandal began with the New England Patriots and the Indianapolis Colts’ AFC Championship Game. On Wednesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejected a request from Patriots quarterback Tom Brady to avoid a four-game suspension for his role in deflating footballs to make them easier to catch during rainy games. For now, it looks like the New England QB will be watching the games from the sidelines.

Why is this still a thing? #Deflategatepic.twitter.com/gLWWtwxGc1

— Ships Have Sailed (@ShipsHaveSailed) July 13, 2016

Click here to read Law Street Media’s previous coverage on “Deflategate.”

The federal appeals court’s decision could finally be the end to a long and embarrassing string of violations, but Brady can still ask the Supreme Court to overrule his suspension. The odds of that happening are slim though, because the Patriot’s first game takes place in less than two months.

“That would be an extremely long shot, and, of course, could not be finally resolved soon, even were the justices to hear the appeal,” said Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond.

The NFL Players Association issued a statement regarding the court’s ruling to deny Brady’s request. The statement reads:

We are disappointed with the decision denying a rehearing, as there were clear violations of our collective bargaining agreement by the NFL and Commissioner Roger Goodell. Despite today’s result, the track record of this League office when it comes to matters of player discipline is bad for our business and bad for our game. We have a broken system that must be fixed. We will review all of our options carefully on behalf of Tom Brady and all NFL players.

Tom Brady when he heard his 4-Game Suspension was being upheld. #Deflatriots #DeflateGate https://t.co/l9b3S4hscM

— SteelersNation (@TheSteelZone) July 14, 2016

The transformation and complications of the scandal will make the law course on the topic an intriguing option for students. The scandal has transformed from cheating accusations over the air pressure in footballs, to a multi-million dollar legal battle involving the nation’s top lawyers. It has also raised questions about the powers of the commissioner and unionized employees’ right to due process in a disciplinary hearing.

“When deflated footballs dominate national headlines, it’s clear that sports have become much more than just a casual pastime in the United States,” reads the class description. “Often the real game takes place on a playing field where legal, regulatory, and journalistic systems converge on the governance of professional sports.”

The Patriots’ backup quarterback, Jimmy Garoppolo, is expected to fill in for Brady in games against the Arizona Cardinals, Miami Dolphins, Houston Texans, and Buffalo Bills. Brady would be eligible to make his regular-season debut in Week 5 against the Cleveland Browns.

Despite the team playing with a second-string player, the Patriots are still predicted to perform well this upcoming season. But during those four games, Brady is set to lose approximately $235,294 in salary.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post UNH School of Law Offers Course on “Deflategate” appeared first on Law Street.

A Title IX lawsuit against the University of Tennessee-Knoxville has been settled for $2.48 million with a group of eight women who accused the school of fostering a “hostile sexual environment,” listing incidents dating back to 1995, mostly involving allegations against male student athletes.

The announcement of the settlement comes just two days before the university has to formally respond to the case in the U.S. District Court. However, though UT is paying out nearly $2.5 million, it is not admitting guilt or negligence.

The lawsuit was first filed in February, when six women filed a civil suit claiming that athletes who were found guilty of assault went unpunished. They alleged that perpetrators and their teammates discouraged women from reporting rape charges, and that an athlete who tried to help a woman who had been assaulted was attacked by a fellow athlete. The women are dismissing the lawsuit against UT, according to David Randolph Smith, the Nashville attorney who represents the eight women.

“My clients and I are dismissing the lawsuit with prejudice and signed the settlement agreement,” Smith said in a statement. He added:

We are satisfied that, while universities everywhere struggle with these issues, the University of Tennessee has made significant progress in the way they educate and respond to sexual assault cases. My clients and I are also convinced that the University’s leadership is truly committed to continue its exemplary efforts to create a model as it relates to sexual misconduct.

The lawsuit claimed UT’s administrative hearing process was one-sided and denied victims the “rights to a hearing and to the same equal procedural, hearing, and process rights as given to perpetrators of rape and sexual assault.” It also accused the university of interfering with investigations and providing lawyers for students accused of misconduct. The $2.48 million payout from UT to the eight women will be split between UT’s athletic department and central administration. The money will not come from taxpayer dollars, student fees or donor funds, according to the school’s lawyers.

Joe DiPietro, UT System President, announced that in the next few weeks he will appoint an independent commission to review the current programs in place that combat sexual assault, and assess what areas need to be strengthened.

“I continue to say that one incident of sexual misconduct is one too many,” DiPietro said. “But unfortunately, on a college campus, these incidents will happen. When they do, I want the confidence of knowing that we did everything within our power to appropriately deal with the situation, and we provided the necessary support for all involved. There are no excuses for anything less.”

UT Chancellor Jimmy Cheek is also spearheading his own initiatives—he will hire six more people for Title IX compliance positions.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post University of Tennessee Settles Sexual Assault Lawsuit for $2.5 Million appeared first on Law Street.

I never thought I would have anything in common with a Kenyan who was born and raised in a small African village, has two master’s degrees from the University of Nairobi in Kenya and University of Pretoria in South Africa, worked on environment and development policy in East Africa, and now is a technical leader working in the elevation and advancement of the links between population and environment. But on June 23 we had something in common–we were both sipping ginger ale and conversing over the intersectionality of women’s empowerment and climate change. 

Hours before, Clive Mutunga was one of a dozen expert panelists present for “At The Eye of the Storm: Women and Climate Change,” an event geared towards fostering conversations about how women are most affected by climate change and the role they play as victims. According to his fellow panelist Jacqueline Patterson, director of the NAACP’s Environmental and Climate Justice Program, “Climate change exposes gender vulnerabilities.”

“Women are resilience personified.” Roger-Mark De Souza opens Wilson Center #EyeOfTheStorm event pic.twitter.com/QAjWDypkfm

— UniversalAccessProj (@UnivAccessProj) June 23, 2016

The experts in attendance consisted of both men and women who held distinguished positions at the Department of Defense, Congress, Project Concern International (PCI), University of Hawaii Law School, Tetra Tech, and Solar Sister. Most of them appeared to be young and in their thirties, yet they had already accumulated impressive resumes consisting of environmental and humanitarian jobs aimed at helping women effected by climate change. Sono Aibe, a senior advisor at Pathfinder International perfectly encapsulated the ideology of the event saying, “There is no justice in climate change. Nature does not choose its victims, we do.”

Elhers: Women aren’t invisible. We just aren’t listening. @NewSecurityBeat #EyeOfTheStorm

— Maria Prebble (@maria_prebble) June 23, 2016

In developing countries, most women must rely on collecting natural resources (water, food, and energy for cooking and heating) to sustain their livelihood and the livelihood of their families. Uncertain rainfall, drought, and deforestation–all common symptoms of climate change–make it harder for women to maintain their livelihood. Compared to men in these poor countries, women are disadvantaged because of their limited access to education, economic assets, and a place at the table to make decisions on how to combat the problem.

At the event, there were three different panels that looked at the different angles in which climate change disproportionally impacts women.

Women in Crises: Conflict, Disasters, and Complex Emergencies

Most of the panelists on this panel had traveled to remote parts of the world, and experienced first-hand how women were at the center of the effects of climate change in some of the poorest areas. They also shared stories of how violence against women during times of environmental crisis are happening right in our backyards. Patterson elaborated on this by sharing a startling stat from Hurricane Katrina–nearly 300 women were raped during and after the lawless days of the storm.

Similar violence happened to women in Sub-Saharan Africa. Kelly Fish, a gender technical advisor for PCI, recounted one story about an African woman she worked with who had to walk for miles to collect firewood in order to cook for her family. Sadly, the same wood that she had walked miles to retrieve, was used as a tool for violence–her husband beat her with it every night.

Walks to collect water from miles away can also be dangerous for women, Fish explained. Women in the area were encouraged to wear female condoms when walking to collect water because the risk of rape was so high.

Our Bodies, Our Planet: Climate, Gender, and Health

With the U.S. Agency for International Development, Mutunga works in areas where contraception isn’t easily accessible, or there is a lot of ignorance surrounding it–many women end up raising eight or nine children in poverty-stricken areas. It’s not unusual for the daughters who grow up in these families to be sold off as child brides, because as he described during this panel, “Marriage means one less mouth to feed in a poverty-stricken family.”

He added that when women have children young, and have lots of them, it decreases their chances of staying in school and in the workforce–perpetuating the cycle of poverty.

Prez @SuzannePAI discussing the importance of #familyplanning in mitigating effects of climate change #eyeofthestorm pic.twitter.com/PV9zaKjRE8

— PAI (@popact) June 23, 2016

Climate Champions: Women Entrepreneurs & Climate Solutions

The stories of women who had been victimized by the effects of climate change were important to the context of the event, however, the point was not to dwell on the tragedies, but to offer solutions.

“It’s important that we be climate victors and not climate victims,” said Sherri Goodman, former deputy under Secretary of Defense, at the event’s final panel.

Neha Misra, Co-Founder and Chief Collaboration Officer of Solar Sister, a company that provides clean energy technology to remote areas of Africa to help empower women, emphasized that the response to fighting climate change “has to include women.”

“I believe in a world where women, girls, and their communities have access to the sustainable energy they need to create a prosperous life,” she added.

Another panelist, Swathi Veeravalli, a research scientist for the Army Corps of Engineers found in her research that sometimes simple solutions can make a big difference. “If you provide access to lighting, just lightbulbs the incidents of rape go down immediately.”

Roger-Mark De Souza, Director of Population, Environmental Security, and Resilience at the Wilson Center went as far as saying, “every problem we have is linked to climate change.”

The debate over whether or not climate change is real is essentially over, but it is just the beginning when it comes to grasping what the consequences are. Jane Harman, Director, President, and CEO of the Wilson Center, said women should be at the forefront of creating climate change policy. Harman stated,

Climate change is coming to all of us, but women are the ones who are disproportionally hurt— we bare the burden of sick relatives and personal issues. Women as parents and sisters and caregivers, we are qualified to make security policy and to sit at any security policy table in the world. Who should be the leaders in the climate change policy debate? I would say women.

Following the three panels there was a Happy Hour for the panelists to mingle with the audience. I showed up to the event that day wearing a t-shirt, blue jeans, and dirty converse. To say I didn’t fit in with all of the expert panelists and well-dressed young professionals there is an understatement. However, I felt almost a little guilty for worrying about what I showed up in after learning about the women all over the world who have much bigger problems that affect their well-being.

That’s how I started my conversation with Mutunga, and he responded in a thick Kenyan accent, “Think how lucky those women would be to worry about what they were wearing.” After an inspiring chat with him and learning what I did at the panels, I left the event feeling grateful and motivated to make sure I do my part in helping women impacted by climate change.

Editor’s Note: This post has been edited to reflect that one of the featured quotes was said by Sono Aibe, a senior advisor at Pathfinder International. 

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Victimization of Women From Climate Change appeared first on Law Street.

This post is part of Law Street’s continuing analysis of the recent Supreme Court rulings. To read the rest of the coverage click here.

Corruption: McDonnell v. United States

The decision: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously to overturn corruption convictions of former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell and his wife. However, there is still a possibility that they can be retried under the court’s new interpretation of the law.

What corruption charges?

In 2014, McDonnell and his wife were convicted on federal bribery charges. He received luxury gifts and financial benefits from Virginia businessman Jonnie Williams in exchange for what prosecutors deemed “government favors” or “official acts.” In total, the gifts and benefits that the McDonnells received were worth more than $175,000–including a Rolex watch, catering their daughter’s wedding, and a $20,000 shopping trip for Mrs. McDonnell.

“There is no doubt that this case is distasteful; it may be worse than that,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court. “But our concern is not with tawdry tales of Ferraris, Rolexes, and ball gowns. It is instead with the broader legal implications of the Government’s boundless interpretation of the federal bribery statute.”

What does this mean for the future of political bribery?

This case was centered around the question of what constitutes an “official act” under federal law. McDonnell arranged meetings between Williams and state officials in the form of a luncheon thrown at the Governor’s Mansion with a guest list consisting of healthcare leaders. Williams is the chief executive of Star Scientific, a tobacco-based dietary supplement company, and he wanted state universities to perform research on his product.

McDonnell said he never made an official act in favor of Williams or his business, which left the justices searching for where to draw the line between a politician’s regular activities and ones that violate corruption laws. A bipartisan group of officials wrote an amicus brief for the case, arguing that if McDonnell’s convictions were upheld, it would criminalize routine favors that politicians do for donors.

To avoid confusion in the future, Chief Justice John Roberts created a clearer definition of an “official act:”

“In sum, an ‘official act’ is a decision or action on a ‘question, matter, cause, suit, proceeding or controversy,” Roberts wrote. “Setting up a meeting, talking to another official, or organizing an event (or agreeing to do so)–without more–does not fit that definition of an official act.”

Read the full opinion here.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Supreme Court Overturns Former Virginia Governor’s Corruption Conviction appeared first on Law Street.

Tens of thousands of chemicals are used to create our everyday products, and the legislation that regulates them hasn’t been updated for nearly half a decade–but that all changed today. President Obama signed into law Wednesday new regulations that will overhaul toxic chemical use and garnered unexpected bipartisan support from both Republicans and Democrats and environmentalists and the chemical industry.

It has been a long journey but today @POTUS has officially signed #TSCA into law! pic.twitter.com/jCNuVVH4Ll

— Senator Tom Carper (@SenatorCarper) June 22, 2016

The new law is an update of the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act and will now allow the Environmental Protection agency to collect more information about a chemical before it can be used in the United States. Also under the new law, the EPA must conduct a review of all the chemicals currently on the market and make the results public. The EPA will also have to consider the chemical effects on certain demographics like infants, pregnant women, and the elderly.

“This is a big deal. This is a good law. It’s an important law,” Obama said at the bill-signing ceremony at the White House. “Here in America, folks should have the confidence to know the laundry detergent we buy isn’t going to make us sick, [or] the mattress that our babies sleep on aren’t going to harm them.”

The law will also streamline the different states’ rules on regulating the $800 billion industry. Three years of negotiating between lawmakers went into creating this law which aims to “bring chemical regulation into the 21st century,” according to the American Chemistry Council, who backed the bill.

“I want the American people to know that this is proof that even in the current polarized political climate here in Washington, things can work — it’s possible,” Obama said. “If we can get this bill done it means that somewhere out there on the horizon, we can make our politics less toxic as well.”

In recent years, Republicans have been critical of Obama’s efforts to strengthen environmental and climate protections, claiming regulations create unnecessary burdens and stifles business. However, all parties were on board for this bill–it passed in the House with a 403-12 vote.

“That doesn’t happen very often these days,” Obama said. “So this is a really significant piece of business.”

The Environmental Defense Fund called it “the most important new environmental law in decades.” However, as with any law, there are some downsides. The law restricts how and when a state can regulate certain chemicals and limits the EPA’s ability to monitor some imported chemicals. The Environmental Working Group, another organization that supported the bill, criticized that the EPA may not have enough resources or legal authority to review and/or ban chemicals, citing that House Republicans slashed the EPA’s funding and staff in an appropriations bill for next year.

But, on the bright side, the approximate 700 new chemicals that come on the market each year will now have to clear a safety bar first and companies can no longer classify health studies of those chemicals as “confidential business information.” Those studies now must be made available to the public.

The law was named the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, after the late New Jersey Democrat who spent years trying to fix the law. His wife attended the signing at the White House.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Obama Signs Law that Will Overhaul Toxic Chemical Regulations appeared first on Law Street.

Don’t expect to see any Apple gear at the GOP Convention in Cleveland next month–the tech giant announced that it will not provide any funds, devices, or support to this year’s convention, like it has done in the past. Why not? Apple is protesting Donald Trump’s controversial remarks about minorities, women, and immigrants.

So, @realDonaldTrump, you’re such a “great” businessman and negotiator. You’re costing the #RNC sponsors (#Apple, #Ford, etc.). WTF?!#HaHa!

— (((B. Paul Stuart))) (@BrianPaulStuart) June 18, 2016

Apple is the first company in Silicon Valley to take this stance. Others like Google, Facebook, and Microsoft have already pledged some financial support to the convention. At the 2008 Republic and Democrat conventions, Apple donated about $140,000 worth of MacBooks and other products. In 2012, it did not donate free merchandise to the conventions because Democrats placed a ban on corporations financing their nominating events.

A spokeswoman for the GOP convention told Politico that “we are working with a variety of major tech partners who are focused on being part of the American political process.” In April, Google said it would attend the convention and would be the official live stream provider, despite pressure from protestors who called Google to back out because of Trump’s inflammatory comments. Microsoft will donate computers and software, but will not provide funds to Republicans, like it has in the past. Despite Mark Zuckerberg’s criticism of Trump, Facebook has pledged financial and other support to the convention.

Apple declined to comment on its decision, so it’s unclear whether or not it will still provide financial support to the Democratic convention in Philadelphia next month. A spokesperson for the Trump campaign did not respond to Politico’s request for a comment. Donald Trump has singled out Apple in speeches, criticizing CEO Tim Cook’s stance on encryption, while also calling for a boycott on its products.

Of course #Apple is uneasy over Donald J. Trump. Who isn’t? #rnc #uspoli #p2 https://t.co/wxjVfc31wD

— Truth Mashup (@truthmashup) June 19, 2016

Usually, tech companies donate to Democratic and Republican efforts equally. Apple typically does not engage in politics, but Cook has tried to forge relationships with Democrat and Republican lawmakers. Last year, Cook and a handful of top Republican house leaders dined in D.C. together.

However, Apple’s decision is not totally unprecedented. HP, who was a major donor to the GOP convention in 2012, backed out of funding this year’s convention because of pressure from activists at ColorofChange.org in June. The New York Times reported in March that several corporations were thinking about scaling back their donations to the RNC because of Trump’s political ideology.

“We want them to divest from hate. We want them to pull all their money and support,”  said Mary Alice Crim, field director for Free Press Action Fund, which is part of the anti-Trump campaign. She added that tech companies that are backing the convention need to be “thinking hard about where they put their brand, and whether they want to align their brand with racism, hatred, and misogyny.”

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Apple Won’t Support the RNC Because of Trump appeared first on Law Street.

Microsoft came out with more big news this week following its announcement that it will buy LinkedIn. The tech giant is dipping its toes in the marijuana industry, partnering with a startup company that will track legal marijuana to make sure everything is in compliance with regulations from “seed-to-sale.“

As more and more states legalize marijuana either recreationally or medically (the total count is up to 25 states now) corporate companies are shying away from joining the green profit boom–marijuana is illegal in the eyes of the federal government, after all. But, Microsoft is the first big tech company to break this taboo.

KIND Financial, a company focused on cannabis technology, and Microsoft will collaborate with governments to ensure marijuana stays within legal realms. The software will monitor the entire process, from growth and harvest of marijuana plants to sales in stores, entering a special niche in the marijuana market.

Only nine of the twenty-five states that have legalized pot, either medical or recreational, have implemented regulatory systems. These sorts of systems can also track how much marijuana is being sold to whom, the taxes that are being collected, and if growers and sellers are obeying the law.

“Microsoft is helping us support governments in their expansion of cannabis legislation,” KIND CEO David Dinenberg told The New York Times. “They’re experienced at providing platforms for government regulation. This is something Microsoft does every day of the week with other businesses in other categories.”

For now, Microsoft is sticking strictly to the government and compliance side of business, while KIND is more hands-on with the weed, but that could change. In the beginning, Microsoft will market the software at government-employee conferences, but it could eventually make appearances at cannabis events where KIND already has a regular presence. KIND, a start-up from Los Angeles, is one of the many companies trying to mainstream the marijuana industry. One of their most popular products is an ATM-style kiosk that dispenses marijuana.

“We do think there will be significant growth,” Kimberly Nelson, the executive director of state and local government solutions at Microsoft, told The New York Times. “As the industry is regulated, there will be more transactions, and we believe there will be more sophisticated requirements and tools down the road.”

Although KIND and Microsoft do not currently have any state contracts, they have applied to provide their software to Puerto Rico, which legalized medical marijuana earlier this year. Microsoft’s willingness to join the up-and-coming legalized weed industry is a big step forward.

“Nobody has really come out of the closet, if you will,” said Matthew Karnes, the founder of Green Wave Advisors, a company that provides data and analysis of the marijuana business. “It’s very telling that a company of this caliber is taking the risk of coming out and engaging with a company that is focused on the cannabis business.”

State governments and weed stores alike are relying on start-ups like KIND to facilitate the sales flowing through the industry. Because many banks are unwilling to hold money that is “illegal” in a federal sense, dispensaries are forced to rely on cash or the types of kiosks like those that KIND provides. States like Washington, New Mexico, and Illinois currently depend on start-ups similar to Kind to monitor marijuana sales.

Either way, partnering with KIND was a solid business decision for Microsoft, whose revenue is declining from its fading software business. Legal marijuana sales are expected to jump to $6.5 billion this year, from $4.8 billion last year; and another five states will vote in the fall on whether or not to legalize marijuana.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Microsoft Enters the Marijuana Industry appeared first on Law Street.

The National Cathedral in Washington D.C. is the latest institution to join the conversation about how to handle its ties with the Confederate flag. Two images of the Confederate flag are featured on its stained-glassed windows, and have been there for nearly 60 years, but discussions on what the church is going to do about them only began a few months ago. The church announced Wednesday that the Confederate flags would be removed, but the timeline concerning their removal and other details of the operation are still a little foggy.

The stained-glass windows commemorate General Stonewall Jackson and General Robert E. Lee of the Confederate Army, and were installed in 1953, almost a century after the Civil War ended. They were at least partially funded by the Daughters of the Confederacy and a private donor from the North, and according to interim dean of the cathedral Mariann Budde, the images represented “the way the Civil War memory was encoded in American history in the 20th century.”

National Cathedral Will Remove Confederate Flag Stained Glass Windows https://t.co/KzZI7mkq8C

— NPR (@NPR) June 9, 2016

Despite all of the time church officials spend in the cathedral, none of them noticed it until after the Charleston shooting last summer. “That’s when it resurfaced in our consciousness that the Confederate flag was part of our stained-glass artistry,” Budde said.

The previous dean of the cathedral, Rev. Gary Hall, ordered that the windows be taken down. Exactly when the stained-glass windows will be removed is unclear, but Budde confirmed that the Confederate flags will be removed and replaced with plain glass, “as soon as we can do it,” which should not be longer than a few weeks, she said. However, church leadership are not the only ones with the power to decide how to move forward. The cathedral is hosting a series of public forums and events dealing with racism, slavery, and racial reconciliation to get other input and perspectives.

“The Lee-Jackson windows call the question of race and the legacy of slavery, and instead of turning away from that question, the cathedral has decided to lean into it,” said the Rev. Dr. Kelly Brown Douglas, the cathedral’s canon theologian. “Instead of simply taking the windows down and going on with business as usual, the cathedral recognizes that, for now, they provide an opportunity for us to begin to write a new narrative on race and racial justice at the cathedral and perhaps for our nation.”

The cathedral’s announcement to remove and replace the Confederate flags from the stained-glass windows is the most recent in a string of Confederate-related controversy around the country. On Tuesday, Mississippians protested for the removal of the Confederate icon from their state flag. Georgetown is struggling with how to deal with selling 272 slaves to bolster its finances more than a century ago, and last year, South Carolina removed the Confederate flag from the grounds of the Statehouse.

A task force dedicated to examining the status of the Confederate flag on the stained-glass window was assembled a few months ago, and has since recommended that the cathedral also conduct an audit of all the art and iconography on its premises. “Whatever the Chapter’s final decision, ultimately, the windows will not live in the cathedral in the same way they have in the past,” the task force said.

The public forums will begin Sunday, July 17 at 4 p.m. with a panel discussion titled “What the White Church Must Do.”

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post National Cathedral Debates the Future of its Confederate Flag Iconography appeared first on Law Street.

For the first time in history, historians believe, a university president met with a descendant of slaves that worked as laborers on its campus. Georgetown University president John J. DeGioia took this historical first step Tuesday in Spokane, Washington, in an attempt to make amends with Georgetown’s slave-owning past.

DeGioia met with Patricia Bayonne-Johnson, the great-great-great granddaughter of Nace and Biby Butler, two of the 272 slaves Georgetown sold in 1838–the proceeds partially went to paying off the school’s debts in a time of financial distress. The two chatted at the local library for 45 minutes before heading to lunch at the nearby Davenport Hotel.

“I wanted to show him my family, that they are real people,” Bayonne-Johnson, an amateur genealogist and retired teacher, said, adding that she respects DeGioia’s efforts to “to honor the sacrifice and legacy” of her ancestors.

In 1838, Georgetown University was financially struggling, and sold 272 of its slaves for about $500,000, roughly the equivalent of $3.3 million today. Jesuit priests, who founded and operated the university, owned the slaves. The slaves were sold to Louisiana, uprooting and separating dozens of families.

For years, Georgetown University swore that there were no living descendants of the slaves the school sold back in 1838. But Georgetown isn’t the only university grappling with ties to slavery and racism–dozens of others across the nation have recognized their pasts as well. In the fall, students at Georgetown pushed for the removal of the names of two former university presidents from campus buildings due to their involvement in the slave sale.

DeGioia agreed to change the names of the buildings, and went a step further and created a committee dedicated to deciding the university’s response to its past. The list of possibilities includes: apologizing for profiting from slave labor, creating a memorial to those that were enslaved, or providing scholarships for their descendants. The report is expected to come out this summer, according to DeGioia.

Inspired by the protests last fall, Georgetown alum Richard J. Cellini founded the Georgetown Memory Project, a nonprofit to help find and support the descendants of the slaves who were sold. Bayonne-Johnson is involved in the project, along with seven other genealogists and several researchers.

Earlier this year, the university built an online digital archive that consists of records describing the slave sale and the Jesuit and Louisiana plantations. Craig Wilder, a historian at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology applauded how Georgetown is handling their past. “Georgetown has made a decision to recognize the humanity of the problem they’re dealing with, to treat it as more than a public relations problem,” he said.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Georgetown President Meets With Descendant Of Sold Slaves appeared first on Law Street.

Former double-amputee Olympic sprinter Oscar Pistorius is a “broken man” and is unfit to testify at his sentencing for murder, according to the defense’s clinical psychologist. Today marks the last week of Pistorius’ highly publicized sentencing trial in South Africa, and a final sentence will be announced by Friday.

Dr. Jonathan Scholtz said Pistorius suffered from anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress syndrome, and putting him in jail would only worsen his mental state. Instead, Scholtz suggested that Pistorius be sentenced to community service or be hospitalized.

“Since the offence he has developed a serious psychiatric condition which has become worse over the past two years,” Scholtz said. He also argued that Pistorius did not pose a threat to society, and further incarceration “would not be psychologically or socially constructive.”

Here is a play-by-play of the hearing:

Oscar Pistorius is ‘broken’ and should be in hospital, sentencing hearing told https://t.co/p42Avg8KM4

— Guardian news (@guardiannews) June 13, 2016

In case you missed it, Pistorius was sentenced in 2013 for killing his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp on Valentine’s Day. He said he thought she was an intruder–shooting her through the bathroom door four times.

Since the incident, Pistorius has sold all of his firearms and is still traumatized by the sound of them, according to Scholtz. The prosecution didn’t buy it. Chief prosecutor Gerrie Nel suggested that Pistorius felt sorry for himself and had not shown true remorse. Nel also questioned Scholtz’s claim that Pistorius was unfit to testify, stating he was perfectly fine to do an interview recently with a local television station about the killing.

Pistorius received some harsh backlash on Twitter for being labeled as unfit to testify.

Dear @OscarPistorius me and most people I know have ‘not being rich anxiety disorder’. Please give us your money to help us overcome this

— Will Black (@WillBlackWriter) June 13, 2016

So murderers (Oscar Pistorius) and rapists (Brock Turner) shouldn’t go to jail bc it’ll impact them emotionally. When did jail become a spa?

— AL (@MissSchliez) June 13, 2016

Pistorius was charged with culpable homicide in October 2014, which carries a five year sentence and is similar to manslaughter in the United States. After serving a year in prison, he was released on house arrest. However, because of his athlete-celebrity status, he was unsurprisingly not treated the same as the rest of the prisoners. During his time in jail, he stayed  in a private cell in the hospital wing and he spent his time on house arrest kicking it at his uncle’s mansion. In December 2015, his conviction was changed to murder in the Supreme Court of Appeals, which decided that whoever was behind the door was irrelevant because Pistorius should have known that pulling the trigger would cause death.

The minimum sentence for murder in South Africa is 15 years, but a judge can pare it down depending on the circumstances. Prosecutors and Steenkamp’s family argued at the trial that Pistorius deliberately killed her after an argument, so they are working to ensure he receives the full 15 year punishment. However, Scholtz described Pistorius’s relationship with his girlfriend as “normal” and “loving” with “no signs of abuse or coercion.” Pistorius tried to overturn the upgraded murder charge earlier this year, but failed, which is why a new sentencing hearing was called this week.

Steenkamp was 29 when she was killed, an up-and-coming model, a law school graduate, and a budding reality TV star.

Pistorius, known as the “Blade Runner” for his carbon-fiber prosthetic legs, is known globally for being able to compete against able-bodied athletes, especially during the 2012 London Olympics. He has also competed in three Paralympics.

Judge Thokozile Masipa is presiding over the hearing—the same judge who originally convicted Pistorius.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Defense Psychologist Calls Oscar Pistorius A “Broken Man,” Unfit To Testify appeared first on Law Street.

An innocent evening at a busy chocolate bar in Tel Aviv turned deadly Wednesday night when two Palestinian gunmen opened fire killing two Israelis—reigniting terrorism fears in the country. Another nine people suffered gunshot wounds, and four people are still being treated at the hospital, including one suspect, according to Israel’s national emergency medical service.

The Israeli  military quickly responded Thursday morning, announcing it will deploy hundreds of troops to the West Bank, including soldiers from infantry and special forces units. In Tel Aviv, extra police units were sent to monitor public places like train and bus stations. Thousands of Israeli police will also be deployed to Jerusalem’s Al Aqsa Mosque for tonight’s Ramadan prayers, which tens of thousands of people usually attend.

Video footage from nearby shops show customers fleeing in panic, knocking over tables, rushing to escape the violence.

VIDEO: People running away after shooting in central #TelAviv #Israel – @AmichaiStein1 pic.twitter.com/A1HPYcEfbc

— Conflict News (@Conflicts) June 8, 2016

“People were having coffee. I saw a birthday cake on one of the tables,” said one witness. “And then you see the chairs upside down and glass shattered and blood all over.”

One of the attackers was shot by police and the other surrendered, but their names cannot be released because Israeli authorities have issued a gag order on details that could identify them. However, police did say that the attackers are cousins, both in their twenties.

PHOTO: Shooter being arrested. Caught on a nearby streat. Reports of 5-7 wounded #TelAviv #Israel – @AAhronheim pic.twitter.com/m6tNIRlM2p

— Conflict News (@Conflicts) June 8, 2016

The military froze work permits for 204 of the attackers’ family members, and plans are underway to demolish the family home of one of the gunmen–a tactic common in Israel to punish terrorists.

Other Palestinians are also being penalized for the terrorists’ actions. Israel has frozen nearly 83,000 Palestinians’ permits, barring them from entering Israel. Special Ramadan permits were also suspended for Palestinians in the Gaza Strip to visit relatives in Israel, travel abroad, and attend prayers at the Al Aqsa Mosque, according to the Israeli defense organization, COGAT.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the shooting “a savage crime, murder in the heart of Tel Aviv. We will take the necessary steps to attack the attackers and defend those who need to be defended.”

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas issued a statement condemning violence against civilians, although he did not directly reference the Tel Aviv shootings.

“The presidency has repeatedly emphasized that it stands against attacks on civilians, regardless of their sources or justifications,” the statement said. “Achieving just peace and creating a positive atmosphere is the way to ease tension and end violence.”

The mayor of Tel Aviv took to Twitter to express his thoughts:

“We will continue to live in this city of #TelAviv. We will continue to build, create and enjoy the city. #Terror will not defeat us…”

— Mayor of Tel Aviv (@MayorOfTelAviv) June 8, 2016

Hamas, the Palestinian government arm of the Gaza Strip that has been deemed a terrorist organization by the West, and Islamic Jihadists, a militant group in Israel, both praised the attacks, but neither claimed responsibility for it.

The attack took place at one of Tel Aviv’s most popular spots, Sarona, home to dozens of shops, restaurants, and cafes. It is also located across the street from Israel’s Defense Ministry and main army headquarters. Being as busy as it is, it is nearly impossible to secure, according to CNN law enforcement analyst Steve Moore.

“It’s a classic soft terror target,” he said. “It is really indefensible. It is a mall. You are not going to set up a system whereby, absent body searches, you are going to stop these things.”

In the past nine months, Palestinians have killed 32 Israelis and two Americans in dozens of attacks against civilians and security forces. Israelis have killed about 200 Palestinians during the same time frame.

U.S. State Department deputy spokesman Mark Toner issued a statement condemning the attacks:

“These cowardly attacks against innocent civilians can never be justified,” he said. “We are in touch with Israeli authorities to express our support and concern.”

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Israel Intensifies Troop Presence After Tel Aviv Shooting appeared first on Law Street.

Want to shoot a drug dealer in the Philippines? No worries, you won’t go to jail, you’ll actually be rewarded under president-elect Rodrigo Duterte. In a nationally televised speech late Saturday, Duterte encouraged citizens to take the law into their own hands by using deadly force against drug dealers who threaten them or resist arrest.

“If he fights, and he fights to the death, you can kill him,” he said. “Shoot him and I’ll give you a medal.”

Critics have dubbed Détente, who won the presidency last month, the “Filipino Donald Trump.” His campaign promise that landed him the victory? He vowed to end crime and corruption within the first six months of his presidency, which explains the support he gives civilians in handling drug lords on their own. “Please feel free to call us, the police, or do it yourself if you have the gun … you have my support,” he added.

Also in an attempt to cut crime and corruption, Duterte, 71, announced that he is increasing the bounty for drug lords from 3 million Philippine pesos ($65,000) to  five million pesos ($108,000). “I’m not saying that you kill them, but the order is ‘dead or alive,” he said.

Drug lords aren’t the only part of crime and corruption Duterte is concerned with–also on his agenda is removing corrupt police officers. In his speech, he asked three police generals based in the capital to resign for unspecified crimes. If they don’t quit, he threatened to humiliate them in public, or perhaps worse–kill them. Because some cops may have bribed their way back to the force after being involved with some sort of drug scheme, Duterte is also calling for a review of dismissed criminal cases of active police.

“To all police who have cases and are wanted now, if you are still involved in drugs, I will kill you,” he said. “Don’t take this as a joke. I’m not making you laugh.”

Not only does Duterte encourage civilians to resort to whatever means necessary to take down a drug lord, he also supports security forces shooting and killing anyone that resists arrest. Duterte, above all, really knows what it means to take matters into your hands. While he was the mayor of Davao City, he pulled the trigger on many suspected motorcycle-riding assassins, better known as “Davao death squads.” 

“Me? They are saying that I’m part of a death squad? True, that’s true,” he said.

However, human rights activists say that he has never been charged because no one has dared to testify against him. Many Filipino citizens may love his anti-crime and corruption rhetoric, but human rights activists fear that it will lead to widespread rights violations.

Police and drug lords aren’t the only ones who can fall to corruption, journalists are also guilty, Duterte thinks. 

“Just because you’re a journalist you are not exempted from assassination, if you’re a son of a bitch,” Duterte said. “Freedom of expression cannot help you if you have done something wrong.”

Duterte begins his six-year term June 30.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Filipino President-Elect: It’s OK For Civilians To Kill Drug Lords appeared first on Law Street.

U.S. Marines now have more flexibility with the tattoos they can sport in uniform, thanks to the updated tattoo policy that was overhauled last week. However, the Marines continue to have one of the strictest tattoo policies in the military.

Marines still aren’t allowed to have full sleeves, but now they can get as many tattoos as they would like–as long as their physical training uniforms, which consist of green T-shirts and shorts, fully cover them.

The new restrictions also prohibit soldiers from having tattoos that are located on the face, neck, wrists, knees, and mouth. The one exception to that rule is band tattoos, which are now allowed if they do not exceed three inches, or the width of the marine’s four fingers–spanning from the index to pinkie finger.

Body art policies have undergone varying changes across military services in the past year, mainly to take into consideration the rising number of young potential recruits who are getting ink.

“Society is changing its view of tattoos, and we have to change along with that,” said former Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno while the policy was still being decided on. “It makes sense. Soldiers have grown up in an era when tattoos are much more acceptable and we have to change along with that.”

Lower arm and lower leg tattoos are allowed if they are smaller than the size of the Marine’s palm. There is no limit as to how many visible tattoos enlisted personnel can have if they are in compliance with size, but officials can have no more than four visible tattoos. The restriction remains the same as to the type of tattoos that can be donned–the Marine’s body art cannot be extreme, obscene, indecent, racist, or sexist.

The Marine Corps tweeted out a helpful photo illustrating the locations on the body where tattoos are authorized.

Marines, the update to the tattoo regulation is out.

Link to the update: https://t.co/bDDPB8TIq9 pic.twitter.com/cKkORcalHo

— U.S. Marines (@USMC) June 2, 2016

Former Commandant General Robert Neller said he was surprised at how often the topic of tattoos came up when speaking with Marine recruits. Neller told the Marine Corps Times that the Marine Corps isn’t a “rock and roll band.”

Neller added,

We’re Marines. We have a brand. People expect a certain thing from us and right now, if you’re in PT uniform, you can be completely tatted up under your PT uniform. That’s not enough? You can still get certain size tattoos on your arms and your legs. How much do you want?

Others have expressed their opinions via social media.

@USMC So let me get this straight, a guy can now wear a skirt if he identifies as a woman yet we are conserved with tattoos? #backassward

— Todd Peterson (@tcp1775) June 2, 2016

@USMC when your profession is killing, do you need to look professional? #whyigotout #pussification

— Brandon Collier (@Bran_Collier) June 2, 2016

@USMC let the Marines be they put their lives on the line every day why is it an issue where they put a tattoo

— Michael Wilson (@madmikerules) June 3, 2016

Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps Ronald L. Green told CNN that he “wanted the policy to allow Marines freedom and flexibility to express themselves while also being clearly written and understandable for both Marines and their leadership.”

The Manpower and Reserve Affairs will handle violations of the tattoo policy, and regular spot checks are to be expected, according to the 32-paged detailed set of rules.

“Marines should understand that violating any policy has consequences and leadership will hold Marines accountable accordingly,” Green said.

If Marines have a tattoo that violates the current policy, they can go to the board and have it documented within 120 days of the policy update announcement and not be punished.

In the Navy, sailors are allowed to have neck tattoos, full sleeve tattoos, and any size or quantity of tattoos below the neck and knee. The Navy’s more relaxed tattoo policy was issued in March and aims to “ensure the Navy does not miss opportunities to bring in talented young men and women who are willing to serve,” according to a statement on its website.

Like the Navy, the Army does not restrict the size or amount of tattoos on a soldier’s arms or legs, according to its policy which was updated just last year. The Air Force’s tattoo policy is currently under review, and the new updates should be announced this fall.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post U.S. Marine Corps Relaxes Tattoo Policy appeared first on Law Street.