10/15/2012
Caught on camera: Little league coach hits referee
| By NBCMiami.com A little league football assistant coach could be facing assault charges after he was caught on video punching a referee during a game in West Park over the weekend, police said Monday. The incident happened Saturday evening during a game between the West Park Saints and Miramar Patriots at Mc Tyre Park at 3501 Southwest 56th Avenue, according to a Broward Sheriff's Office report. According to the report, referee Andrew Keigans gave the Saints a penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct after one of the assistant coaches made a derogatory comment from the sidelines. After he threw the flag, Keigans turned around an bumped one of the players and moved the player to the side to talk to one of the other referees, the report said. See original story, video on NBCMiami.com The assistant coach, who disagreed with the penalty, barged the field and confronted Keigans as he was held back by head coach Antonio Lane, the report said. Because the assistant coach left the sidelines and entered the field of play to confront Keigans, the head referee decided to end the game, the report said. Watch the Top Videos on NBCNews.com At that point, the entire coaching staff and parents of the young players ran onto the field to confront Keigans. As Keigans started walking off the field, the Saints' assistant coach ran towards him and slapped him on the face with his left hand. The slap sent Keigans to the ground and knocked his hat off. The entire incident was captured on a video posted to YouTube. The assistant coach was later identified as 43-year-old Dion Robinson. He hasn't been arrested yet but could face an assault charge, the BSO said. More content from NBCNews.com:
|
FDA: More drugs from Mass. facility are suspect
Mediator sets payment rules for Aurora shooting victims
| By NBC News staff and wire services DENVER -- The families of the 12 people killed and those who suffered permanent injuries in the July 20 shooting at an Aurora, Colo., movie theater will get the majority of the $5 million donated to help the victims, a governor-appointed mediator says. Kenneth Feinberg said Monday those two classes of victims will get 70 percent of the money, or about $200,000 each, based on current donations. The Aurora Victim Relief Fund currently has $4,961,739, according to a statement released by Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper's office. The rest of the donations will go to people who suffered physical injuries, based on the number of days they were hospitalized. Feinberg identified the categories as "victims hospitalized for 20 days or more; victims hospitalized for between eight and 19 days; and victims hospitalized between one and seven days." Victims within each category will receive the same payment. There were 58 people wounded in the attack. Feinberg said due to limited funds, victims who did not require overnight hospitalization and claims for mental trauma will not be compensated. Watch US News videos on NBCNews.com Former University of Colorado-Denver graduate student James E. Holmes is charged with carrying out the the attack during a showing of a Batman movie. "We are extremely grateful to Ken Feinberg for his service to victims and their families and to the state of Colorado," said Hickenlooper in a statement. "He has proven once again why he is the nation's leading expert in handling these kinds of matters. Those most impacted by the theater shooting are best served by a speedy and fair distribution of the Aurora Victim Relief Fund and Ken is delivering as promised." Stay informed with the latest headlines; sign up for our newsletter Feinberg also said Monday was the last day for the public to donate through Community First Foundation's GivingFirst.Org website. Checks, however, will be accepted through Nov. 15, according to the statement. Feinberg oversaw the compensation fund for victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Hickenlooper recruited Feinberg in September to expedite the disbursement of the Colorado fund and curb turmoil that had grown over the donation process, The Denver Post reported. More content from NBCNews.com:
|
Early victim misdiagnosed
Report: Military recruiters shot paintballs at homeless
| By Jeff Black, NBC News Military recruiters with the Arizona Army National Guard engaged in a pattern of systemic misbehavior over the past decade that included instances of sexual abuse, forgery, embezzlement and assaults, including riding in a Humvee and shooting paintball guns at homeless people, according to a five-month investigation by The Arizona Republic newspaper. The newspaper cites interviews with military officers, police reports and military documents obtained through public records requests. The alleged wrongdoing was primarily carried out by a small group of military recruiters assigned to visit high schools as part of efforts to enlist them in the armed forces, according to the newspaper. National Guard investigators said commanders failed to hold subordinates accountable for wrongdoing, partly because they also allegedly engaged in unethical behavior. In response to the investigation, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announced an inquiry into Arizona's military operations by a National Guard officer of another state. Watch US News videos on NBCNews.com "Gov. Brewer has called for a full, fair and independent review of the Arizona National Guard, its personnel and policies, and the discipline that has been handed down for the recent instances of misconduct that have been documented," Matthew Benson, a spokesman for Brewer, told NBC News. Benson said Brewer was in the process of identifying the appropriate outside party to carry out the review. "She would like the inquiry to begin as quickly as possible so that she is provided credible information with which to judge the conduct of the Arizona National Guard and its leaders," Benson said in a statement. The highest-ranking officer at Arizona National Guard, Maj. Gen. Hugo Salazar, acknowledged discipline problems and failures by commanders. "I acknowledge there was a problem," Salazar, told the Republic, "We should have had more command emphasis. We should have paid more attention." Salazar said he did not think the there is an ongoing problem. Military documents detail that non-commissioned officers caught driving drunk in military vehicles were dealt with lightly, and recruiters who forged records or took fraudulent bonus paychecks only received transfers, the Republic reports. In addition, sergeants who had affairs with teenage recruits were given counseling. One staff sergeant, the paper reported, allegedly had sex with a female enlistee but was still allowed to deploy overseas. While overseas, he was disciplined for similar offenses, and was transferred to the California National Guard as a recruiter, according to the report. On Monday, the newspaper reported that Staff Sgt. Chad Wille, a recruiter who blew the whistle about the alleged misconduct, had been harassed afterward. A bicyclist had reported incidents of a camouflage-painted Humvee driving down Seventh Street in north Phoenix shooting paintballs at pedestrians. When Wille questioned a colleague, Sgt. 1st Class Michael Amerson, about it, Amerson reportedly replied, "You're not aware of the bum hunts?" Further investigations would unearth more allegations of sexual misconduct, including offering homeless women food, money or drinks for exposing their breasts.
|
Supreme Court to hear Ariz. voter ID case
| The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Monday to consider whether Arizona can demand that voters show proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections.
The high court will not hear the case before the Nov. 6 U.S. election, ensuring that the disputed registration requirement in Arizona will not be in effect. The legal dispute over the registration requirement dates back to 2004 when Arizona voters passed a ballot initiative, Proposition 200, designed to stop illegal immigrants from voting. The measure amended state election laws to require voters to show proof of citizenship to register to vote, as well as identification to cast a ballot at the polls. Arizona residents, Indian tribes and civil rights groups sued to challenge measure. The registration law requires voters to present "satisfactory evidence" of U.S. citizenship, including a driver's license number, naturalization papers, U.S. birth certificate or passport. It is one of many measures nationwide championed by Republicans and put in place at the state level that Democrats say are intended to make it more difficult for certain voters who tend to vote Democratic to cast ballots. Arizona, which borders Mexico, has been a focal point of immigration laws. In a landmark case, the U.S. Supreme Court in June upheld Arizona's provision on immigration status checks by police. But it also struck down rules in the state's measure that would, among other things, ban illegal immigrants from soliciting work in public places. While the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Arizona's right to require voter identification at polling places, the court in April found that the citizenship requirement conflicted with a 1993 federal law designed to make it easier for people to register to vote in federal elections by using a federal registration form. 'Operate harmoniously' On appeal, Arizona argued that the 9th Circuit owed more deference to the state's authority to administer federal elections. The dispute over the citizenship registration requirement differs from challenges to state voter ID laws unfolding in courts across the country. The Arizona case focuses on the tension between federal and state authority over elections while the voter ID challenges focus on the laws' alleged discriminatory effects. Voter ID laws in U.S. states have suffered a series of setbacks in courts ahead of the November election. The laws require voters to show certain types of identification before voting. Judge blocks Pennsylvania voter ID lawIn 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a voter identification law passed by Indiana, leading many experts to conclude that it would be hard to challenge such laws in court. Since the last presidential election in 2008, some 15 states have passed or tightened legislation requiring people to identify themselves before voting. Defenders of the laws, mostly Republicans, say the laws are needed to prevent people from fraudulently impersonating registered voters at the election booth. Opponents, mostly Democrats, complain that obtaining identification documents is an undue burden that could disenfranchise the poor, minorities and the elderly - people who may tend to vote Democratic. The June ruling in the Arizona immigration case went to the heart of a fierce national debate between Democrats and Republicans over the 11.5 million illegal immigrants the U.S. government estimates to be in the country. President Barack Obama has vowed to push for comprehensive immigration legislation if re-elected. Opinion polls show Hispanic voters overwhelmingly support Obama. Republicans generally back stricter controls on illegal immigration than Democrats. In the Republican primaries to pick a presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, Obama's challenger, took a hard line, saying he supported what he called self-deportation for illegal immigrants. In Monday's order, the Supreme Court granted Arizona's appeal without comment. A decision is expected by the end of June 2013. The case is Arizona v. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona Inc et al, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 12-71. (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2012. Click For Restrictions - http://about.reuters.com/fulllegal.asp |