Breaking News Events

[Kobi]

STEUBENVILLE, Ohio (AP) — Two members of the high school football team that is the pride of Steubenville were found guilty Sunday of raping a drunken 16-year-old girl in a case that bitterly divided the Rust Belt city and led to accusations of a cover-up to protect the community's athletes.

Steubenville High School students Trent Mays and Ma'Lik Richmond were sentenced to at least a year in juvenile jail, capping a case that came to light via a barrage of morning-after text messages, social media posts and online photos and video. Mays was sentenced to an additional year in jail on a charge of illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material, to be served after his rape sentence is completed.

The two teens broke down in tears after the verdict was read and later apologized to the victim and to the community. Both were emotional as they spoke, and Richmond struggled at times to talk through his sobs. Richmond's father, Nathaniel, also asked that the victim's family "forgive Malik and Trent for the pain they put you through."

Mays, 17, and Richmond, 16, were charged with digitally penetrating the West Virginia girl, first in the back seat of a moving car after an alcohol-fueled party on Aug. 11, and then in the basement of a house.

The case roiled the community amid allegations that more students should have been charged — accusations that Ohio's attorney general pledged to look into — and led to questions about the influence of the local football team, a source of a pride in a community of 18,000 that suffered massive job losses with the collapse of the steel industry. Their arms linked, protesters who sought guilty verdicts stood outside the courthouse Sunday morning, some wearing masks.

The trial opened last week as a contest between prosecutors determined to show the girl was so drunk she couldn't have been a willing participant that night, and defense attorneys soliciting testimony from witnesses that would indicate that the girl, though drunk, knew what she was doing.

The teenage girl testified Saturday that she could not recall what happened the night of the attack but remembered waking up naked in a strange house after drinking at a party. The girl said she recalled drinking, leaving the party holding hands with Mays and throwing up later. When she woke up, she said she discovered her phone, earrings, shoes, and underwear were missing, she testified.

"It was really scary," she said. "I honestly did not know what to think because I could not remember anything."

The girl said she believed she was assaulted when she later read text messages among friends and saw a photo of herself taken that night, along with a video that made fun of her and the alleged attack. She said she suspected she had been drugged because she couldn't explain being as intoxicated as defense witnesses have said she was.

"They treated her like a toy," said special prosecutor Marianne Hemmeter.

Evidence introduced at the trial included graphic text messages sent by numerous students after the night of the party, including by the accuser, containing provocative descriptions of sex acts and obscene language. Lawyers noted during the trial how texts have seemed to replace talking on the phone for contemporary teens. A computer forensic expert called by the state documented tens of thousands of texts found on 17 phones seized during the investigation.

In sentencing the boys, Judge Thomas Lipps urged everyone who had witnessed what happened in the case, including parents, "to have discussions about how you talk to your friends, how you record things on the social media so prevalent today and how you conduct yourself when drinking is put upon you by your friends."

The girl herself recalled being in a car later with Mays and Richmond and asking them what happened.

"They kept telling me I was a hassle and they took care of me," she testified. "I thought I could trust him (Mays) until I saw the pictures and video."

In questioning her account, defense attorneys went after her character and credibility. Two former friends of the girl testified that the accuser had a history of drinking heavily and was known to lie.

"The reality is, she drank, she has a reputation for telling lies," said lawyer Walter Madison, representing Richmond.

The two girls testified they were angry at the accuser because she was drinking heavily at the party and rolling around on the floor. They said they tried unsuccessfully to get her to stop drinking.

Nathaniel Richmond urged during the sentencing that parents speak to their children about "the dangers of alcohol and how it can lead to bad decisions that will affect the rest of your life." He said he himself was an alcoholic.

The accuser said that she does not remember being photographed as she was carried by Mays and Ma'Lik Richmond, an image that stirred up outrage, first locally, then globally, as it spread online. Others have testified the photo was a joke and the girl was conscious when it was taken.

The photograph led to allegations that three other boys, two of them members of Steubenville High's celebrated Big Red team, saw something happening that night and didn't try to stop it but instead recorded it.

The three boys weren't charged, fueling months of online accusations of a cover-up to protect the team, which law enforcement authorities have vehemently denied.

Instead, the teens were granted immunity to testify, and their accounts helped incriminate the defendants. They said the girl was so drunk she didn't seem to know what was happening to her and confirmed she was digitally penetrated in a car and later on a basement floor.

After Mays and Richmond were taken into custody Sunday, Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine said he planned to convene a grand jury next month to investigate whether anyone else should be charged in the case.

Noting that 16 people refused to talk to investigators, many of them underage, DeWine said possible crimes to be investigated include failure to report a felony and failure to report child abuse.

"This community desperately needs to have this behind them, but this community also desperately needs to know justice was done and that no stone was left unturned," he said.

Mays and Richmond were determined to be delinquent, the juvenile equivalent of guilty, Lipps ruled in the juvenile court trial without a jury.

The length of their sentence beyond the minimum one year will be determined by juvenile authorities; they can be held until they're 21. Lipps said that "as bad as things have been for all of the children involved in this case, they can all change their lives for the better."

http://news.yahoo.com/ohio-teens-gui...6028--spt.html

-----------------------------------

The misogyny and sexism through this case has been deplorable. Blaming the victim, questioning her character, innuendo about what determines consent vs no vs incapable of giving consent etc.

Am also not happy that message people seem to want to focus on is be careful when posting or using social media. The message should be rape is not ok period.

[meridiantoo]

This is not necessarily breaking news, but this was news to me. There are several factors that have led to the depletion of the ozone layer, specifically the thinning/hole over the arctic region:

http://www.weather.com/news/science/...cause-20130313

[Sun]

Michelle Shocked Homophobic Rant @ Yoshi's San Francisco

[thedivahrrrself]

Originally Posted by Sun

Michelle Shocked Homophobic Rant @ Yoshi's San Francisco

I was really taken aback by this. First, because I thought she was a lesbian. If not, though, she certainly knew much of her fan base was. Do you think this was deliberate career suicide? Shows have already been cancelled in 4 states, with more to follow.

[Nat]

Originally Posted by Sun

Michelle Shocked Homophobic Rant @ Yoshi's San Francisco

It just seems so out of character with her lyrics. I'm sad about this one.

[meridiantoo]

The rape victim from Steubenville has received threats and harassment:


http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/...ng-rape-victim

[Nat]

Originally Posted by Nat

It just seems so out of character with her lyrics. I'm sad about this one.

Okay so she was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia in the 80s and received electroshock treatment which led to her stage name. I'm not going to worry too much what she thinks of gay people - just hope she gets some help.

[starryeyes]

Girls not allowed to wear tuxedos to prom at a high school in San Bernadino.



http://m.nbcsandiego.com/nbcsandiego...tguid=Rk4d8RSJ

[Kobi]

new policy by CVS Pharmacy requires every one of its nearly 200,000 employees who use its health plan to submit their weight, body fat, glucose levels and other vitals or pay a monthly fine.

Employees who agree to this testing will see no change in their health insurance rates, but those who refuse will have to pay an extra $50 per month - or $600 per year - for the company's health insurance program. All employees have until May 1, 2014, to make an appointment with a doctor and record their vitals.

"The approach they're taking is based on the assumption that somehow these people need a whip, they need to be penalized in order to make themselves healthy," Patient Privacy Rights founder Dr. Deborah Peel said.

Critics are calling the policy coercion, and worrying that CVS or any other company might start firing sick workers.

"It's technology-enhanced discrimination on steroids," Peel said.

The policy change was introduced to employees in a memo highlighting the change in the health insurance plan.

CVS, which is based in Rhode Island, said the health screening was voluntary and the company would never see the test results. In an email to ABC News, CVS explained that its "benefits program is evolving to help our colleagues take more responsibility for improving their health and managing health-associated costs.

"The goal of these kinds of programs is to end up with a healthier work force. If your employees are healthy they're going to work better and they're going to cost the employer a lot less money," ABC News' chief health and medical editor Dr. Richard Besser said.

CVS insists that the use of health screenings by employer-sponsored health plans is a common practice. A quick search of the Internet shows many websites and message boards filled with questions from families asking if similar programs and policies are legal.

Brad Seff, a former Broward County, Fla., employee, learned the hard way that it is legal, according to one court. Seff sued the county in April 2011 after it charged him an extra $40 per month for health insurance after he refused health screenings.

In the suit, Seff said the wellness program violated the Americans With Disabilities Act because the county was making medical inquires of its employees. Seff lost his suit.

----------

Health profiling?

[Okiebug61]

When I worked for OfficeMax they changed their policy where you had to sign off as a non smoker living in a non smoking house with no children at home or away at college that were smokers. If you didn't sign off your insurance rates were much higher. The company actually provided smokers with whatever help and supplies they needed to stop smoking. As an ex smoker I didn't have any problems with it. I do though have major problems with the route CVS is taking. Since they are publically owned I would want to see the reports of the Executive level health made public.

[Kätzchen]

Originally Posted by Kobi

new policy by CVS Pharmacy requires every one of its nearly 200,000 employees who use its health plan to submit their weight, body fat, glucose levels and other vitals or pay a monthly fine.

Employees who agree to this testing will see no change in their health insurance rates, but those who refuse will have to pay an extra $50 per month - or $600 per year - for the company's health insurance program. All employees have until May 1, 2014, to make an appointment with a doctor and record their vitals.

"The approach they're taking is based on the assumption that somehow these people need a whip, they need to be penalized in order to make themselves healthy," Patient Privacy Rights founder Dr. Deborah Peel said.

Critics are calling the policy coercion, and worrying that CVS or any other company might start firing sick workers.

"It's technology-enhanced discrimination on steroids," Peel said.

The policy change was introduced to employees in a memo highlighting the change in the health insurance plan.

CVS, which is based in Rhode Island, said the health screening was voluntary and the company would never see the test results. In an email to ABC News, CVS explained that its "benefits program is evolving to help our colleagues take more responsibility for improving their health and managing health-associated costs.

"The goal of these kinds of programs is to end up with a healthier work force. If your employees are healthy they're going to work better and they're going to cost the employer a lot less money," ABC News' chief health and medical editor Dr. Richard Besser said.

CVS insists that the use of health screenings by employer-sponsored health plans is a common practice. A quick search of the Internet shows many websites and message boards filled with questions from families asking if similar programs and policies are legal.

Brad Seff, a former Broward County, Fla., employee, learned the hard way that it is legal, according to one court. Seff sued the county in April 2011 after it charged him an extra $40 per month for health insurance after he refused health screenings.

In the suit, Seff said the wellness program violated the Americans With Disabilities Act because the county was making medical inquires of its employees. Seff lost his suit.

----------

Health profiling?

I thinks it's more than just health profiling: I am inclined to believe that it's an organizational tool of compliance (read: Coercion).

I also think practices of this organizational type are: highly invasive and an example of poorly veiled prejudice, which seems to skirt violating poorly written law at local, county, state-wide or federal levels of codified law.

And, until Jurisprudence is able to draw succinct connections among violations between civil and human rights issues, I am inclined to think that it will not be too soon before social justice can offer redress in cases such as the account in the article above.

Thank you Kobi for sharing this news article.

eta: I wish there were a lawyer of the caliber that of Thurgood Marshall
to go after causes like this.

[Kelt]

Originally Posted by Kobi

<snip>

Health profiling?

A preview of our upcoming national policies?

[LeftWriteFemme]

Pediatrics Group Backs Gay Marriage, Saying It Helps Children


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/21/he....html?hp&_r=1&

[Kobi]

Two high school football players are accused of sexual assault. Their fellow students take to social media to defend the pair, taunting and blaming the victims.

An athletic director brushes aside the allegations—along with separate hazing, felony robbery and assault charges against the school's athletes—as "not any different than any other community."

Administrators are reluctant to immediately address the accusations and make it appear like a cover-up.

The online hacktivist group Anonymous pledges to expose the truth and publicly shame those who engage in cyberbullying and victim-blaming.

Except this isn't Steubenville, Ohio—it's Torrington, Conn., where two 18-year-olds, Edgar Gonzalez and Joan Toribio, stand accused of second-degree sexual assault of two 13-year-old girls. The investigation has led to the arrest of a 17-year-old male for an alleged assault on one of the 13-year-old girls last fall, police say, and more arrests could be forthcoming.

Gonzalez and Toribio, who live in the same Torrington apartment complex, were arrested last month on the sexual assault charges stemming from separate incidents that occurred around the same time period in February, a Torrington police official said on Wednesday. Both pleaded not guilty.

The investigation is ongoing, Torrington police say, and more arrests could be forthcoming.

"It's very involved," Torrington Police Lt. Mike Emanuel told reporters on Wednesday. "It's very difficult to follow, even for us."

The victims and their alleged attackers knew one another, Emanuel said. "The reason that this is a sexual assault is that there is more than a three-year age difference. That's what we have to keep in mind."

When asked if the sexual contact was consensual, Emanuel said, "Statutorily it is not consensual."

Gonzalez, who had already been facing felony robbery charges related to a March 2012 incident, is being held at a New Haven correction center. Toribio, who was charged with two counts of second-degree sexual assault, was released on $100,000 bond and is being electronically monitored.

Sealed by a Litchfield court, the case had been kept under wraps by school officials until this week, when the Register Citizen reported that "dozens of athletes and Torrington High School students, male and female," taunted the victims on Twitter:

Students flocked to social media in the days surrounding the arrests of Gonzalez and Toribio, with several students offering support for the two football players and others blaming the victims for causing the incident. References included calling a 13-year-old who hangs around with 18-year-olds a “whore,” and claiming the victims “destroyed” the lives of the players.

"Even if it was all his fault," Mary J. Ramirez, whose Twitter handle is @LoryyRamirez, wrote, "what was a 13 year old girl doing hanging around 18 year old guys[?]"

“I wanna know why there’s no punishment for young hoes,” Twitter user @asmedick wrote, according to the paper.

Torrington school officials said on Wednesday that they would investigate the apparent cyberbullying.

"We’re doing everything we can to provide the safety [the alleged victims] need in schools,” Kenneth Traub, Torrington's Board of Education chairman, said on Wednesday.

As was the case in Steubenville, Anonymous has gotten involved, launching "Operation Raider," a reference to the nickname of the Torrington High School football team.

“#OpRaider is the new #OpRollRedRoll," the group tweeted late Wednesday. "Torrington better take note of #Steubenville because they’re about to go on blast. #endrapeculture"

High school football takes on elevated importance in Torrington, a small town in northwest Connecticut. "Like Steubenville," Doug Barry wrote on Jezebel.com, the case in Connecticut "hinges in large part on the seemingly disproportionate influence a school’s football program has on the surrounding community."

Despite the felony robbery charges, Gonzalez was allowed to play football last fall.

“I reeled the kid in after that, and he walked the line," Dan Dunaj, Torrington's former head football coach, told the Register Citizen. "As a coach I was doing something right.”

Dunaj resigned in December amid an ongoing investigation into a hazing incident involving four football players last fall.

"If you think there's some wild band of athletes that are wandering around, then I think you're mistaken," Torrington High School Athletic Director Mike McKenna told the Register Citizen. "If you look at crime statistics, these things happen everywhere and we're not any different than any other community."

In an editorial published on Thursday, the Register Citizen blasted "the posture of denial and defensiveness" Torrington school officials have taken in response to the case:


The first step in recovering from this is admitting you have a problem. And after reading the social media accounts of average, "good" students at Torrington High School, it's clear that Torrington students need an urgent education about blaming the victim, bullying and harassment, what "consent" means, why statutory rape is rape, period, and where football should stand in relation to their education and the rest of life. Let's hope that starts today.
.

[Sun]

Originally Posted by thedivahrrrself

I was really taken aback by this. First, because I thought she was a lesbian. If not, though, she certainly knew much of her fan base was. Do you think this was deliberate career suicide? Shows have already been cancelled in 4 states, with more to follow.

I am not sure what is going on but it was a very upsetting event for many who were in the audience.

Originally Posted by Nat

It just seems so out of character with her lyrics. I'm sad about this one.

Originally Posted by Nat

Okay so she was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia in the 80s and received electroshock treatment which led to her stage name. I'm not going to worry too much what she thinks of gay people - just hope she gets some help.

A medical diagnosis from the 80's may have little or nothing to do with her political statement and outburst. She was able to book events, negotiate the contracts (no small task), show up, perform. This may just be who she is now.

[Kelt]

Originally Posted by Kobi

new policy by CVS Pharmacy requires every one of its nearly 200,000 employees who use its health plan to submit their weight, body fat, glucose levels and other vitals or pay a monthly fine.

Employees who agree to this testing will see no change in their health insurance rates, but those who refuse will have to pay an extra $50 per month - or $600 per year - for the company's health insurance program. All employees have until May 1, 2014, to make an appointment with a doctor and record their vitals.

"The approach they're taking is based on the assumption that somehow these people need a whip, they need to be penalized in order to make themselves healthy," Patient Privacy Rights founder Dr. Deborah Peel said.

Critics are calling the policy coercion, and worrying that CVS or any other company might start firing sick workers.

"It's technology-enhanced discrimination on steroids," Peel said.

The policy change was introduced to employees in a memo highlighting the change in the health insurance plan.

CVS, which is based in Rhode Island, said the health screening was voluntary and the company would never see the test results. In an email to ABC News, CVS explained that its "benefits program is evolving to help our colleagues take more responsibility for improving their health and managing health-associated costs.

"The goal of these kinds of programs is to end up with a healthier work force. If your employees are healthy they're going to work better and they're going to cost the employer a lot less money," ABC News' chief health and medical editor Dr. Richard Besser said.

CVS insists that the use of health screenings by employer-sponsored health plans is a common practice. A quick search of the Internet shows many websites and message boards filled with questions from families asking if similar programs and policies are legal.

Brad Seff, a former Broward County, Fla., employee, learned the hard way that it is legal, according to one court. Seff sued the county in April 2011 after it charged him an extra $40 per month for health insurance after he refused health screenings.

In the suit, Seff said the wellness program violated the Americans With Disabilities Act because the county was making medical inquires of its employees. Seff lost his suit.

----------

Health profiling?

I don't want to derail things, but this one really stuck in my craw. I did a little look around, no deep research or anything, in fact all I did was google the line I bolded above. I came up with a summary report from 2011 that hits on the high points of what companies of various sizes are doing to prepare for national health care.

This is the Mercer's National Survey I ran across. I am still going through it. Pages 4 and 9 show the ramp up to national care. Page 33-34 is a clearly stated objective. Starting on page 51 are the plan incentive ideas. Page 87 is interesting as well from a retirement point of view. Page 92 and on show the already in place ramifications of the national health policy coming. Page 94 confirms these 'incentives' are here to stay.

A couple of terms tossed around in the report are CDHP: "The concept of a CDHP is to return control of health care dollars to the person who uses them, the consumer. The consumer is given a financial incentive to control costs and as a result tend to become more directly involved in the selection and usage of health care services."

And PPACA: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commonly called Obamacare, or the Affordable Care Act

If anyone is interested in this approach to health care that we are seeing, you might want to have a glance, it certainly opened my eyes. This report is a couple of years old and the emphasis is on using positive reinforcement. It would seem that CVS has decided to take the carrot and turn it into a stick. I have seen some plans where a person could protect their privacy for a one time lost discount of maybe $50-100 per year, but at $600 per year as mentioned in the article, I don't think the majority of CVS employees are going to see that as a viable option.

While I agree with the concept of making healthy lifestyle education available to all people (something to counter the current marketing of crap food and latest drugs model), I really don't see forcing it down someones throat as making it somehow more effective. On the contrary, I see it as an effective way to create resentment on a large scale.

I can't wait to see what will be on the table for non-corporate yet required insurance programs for those not currently insured.

Just my .02

Derail/rant over, carry on.

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by Kelt

I don't want to derail things, but this one really stuck in my craw. I did a little look around, no deep research or anything, in fact all I did was google the line I bolded above. I came up with a summary report from 2011 that hits on the high points of what companies of various sizes are doing to prepare for national health care.

This is the Mercer's National Survey I ran across. I am still going through it. Pages 4 and 9 show the ramp up to national care. Page 33-34 is a clearly stated objective. Starting on page 51 are the plan incentive ideas. Page 87 is interesting as well from a retirement point of view. Page 92 and on show the already in place ramifications of the national health policy coming. Page 94 confirms these 'incentives' are here to stay.

A couple of terms tossed around in the report are CDHP: "The concept of a CDHP is to return control of health care dollars to the person who uses them, the consumer. The consumer is given a financial incentive to control costs and as a result tend to become more directly involved in the selection and usage of health care services."

And PPACA: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commonly called Obamacare, or the Affordable Care Act

If anyone is interested in this approach to health care that we are seeing, you might want to have a glance, it certainly opened my eyes. This report is a couple of years old and the emphasis is on using positive reinforcement. It would seem that CVS has decided to take the carrot and turn it into a stick. I have seen some plans where a person could protect their privacy for a one time lost discount of maybe $50-100 per year, but at $600 per year as mentioned in the article, I don't think the majority of CVS employees are going to see that as a viable option.

While I agree with the concept of making healthy lifestyle education available to all people (something to counter the current marketing of crap food and latest drugs model), I really don't see forcing it down someones throat as making it somehow more effective. On the contrary, I see it as an effective way to create resentment on a large scale.

I can't wait to see what will be on the table for non-corporate yet required insurance programs for those not currently insured.

Just my .02

Derail/rant over, carry on.

I understand your frustration.

There is a pervasive need in this country to shift blame whenever possible. Health care is no different. And, the above, has nothing to do with Obamacare. This type of strategy was going on well before Obama took office. He is just the convenient scapegoat.

Big business wants us to believe that if people were just healthier, chose healthier, lived healthier then they would need less care and this would cause costs to drop.

They also want us to believe that their stock piling of our health information is for our own good and will somehow turn us into better, more informed consumers. This too will drive down costs.

They need us to believe whatever cockamamie scheme they cook up i.e. incentives work! justify the potential and real discriminatory practices that they employ.

They need us to believe that WE ARE THE PROBLEM and they are only looking to help us fix OUR problem.

They need to divert attention from the way our economic system works, how the health industry works, how the different costs negotiated by different providers and insurers which is so convoluted I'm not even sure if anyone knows what the actual costs are, how the fallacies about their "research" and production costs justify their exorbident prices in this country while they somehow mange to drop the price to a mere fraction of the supposed cost in other countries where costs are set by the government, the fallacy behind how people overuse or misuse services, the ways in which the food industry has created addicts for their lucrative and specially chosen product lines, etc.

It is a very paternalistic, simplistic, and blaming approach to a very complex and interrelated problem. The makers of statin drugs would be out of business if the food industry didnt provide addictive products that make us walking cholesterol time bombs. We're not even gonna address how both industries are associated with a single parent company. Create both the problem and the solution? Hello? And, you want us to believe your overall goal is to put yourself out of business? Yeah right.

Ok, now my blood pressure is in the dangerous level LOL. Thanks Kelt.

[LeftWriteFemme]

Meet The 83-Year-Old Taking On The U.S. Over Same-Sex Marriage



http://www.npr.org/2013/03/21/174944...e-sex-marriage

[Lady Pamela]

http://now.msn.com/arizona-bathroom-...th-certificate

[Kätzchen]

So, it's not 'breaking news' yet; but just as recently as before the Christmas holidays in December, I got this very large post-card mailer from the state of Oregon (as did other households, region-wide) about what to do in the case of a catastrophic emergency - such as an earthquake, not to mention the possibility of Mt. Hood blowing up.

Yesterday, a librarian friend of mine posted on her page at FB that she spent a fortune in upgrades to her house to make it safe if an earthquake of catastophic magnitude should happen in the near future. With emphasis on... "near future."

Ever since I got that post card mailer in the mail, I've struggled with what engineers and developers and state-appointed law makers know that the general, wider public here in Oregon seem to not be 'in-the-know' about.

I've lived here for the last twenty-some-odd years and have observed how our state has tried to address transportation issues, water issues (rivers, watershed areas, etc), and emergency management issues. And quite frankly, the threat of the unimaginable - either an earthquake or Mt. Hood blowing up - causes me to worry because if something of this nature happens, water and food supplies would be lost and telephone and celltower lines would automatically be affected (trans: you couldn't call for help fast enough or even have some reasonable way to call family members to let them know your plight in an emergency, etc).

Here's the link to the article in The Oregonian (link).