Giuliani being treated like 'a terrorist' by prosecutors, his attorney says
May 18, 2021, 2:52 AM ET
For customer support contact
support@rawstory.com. Report typos and corrections to
corrections@rawstory.com.
Stories Chosen For You
Family of 11-year-old shot by Mississippi cop files federal lawsuit — and analysts think they'll win
May 30, 2023
A federal lawsuit was filed on Tuesday by the family of 11-year-old Aderrien Murry, who was shot by police after he called for 911 asking for help for his mother. The young man, with arms raised, followed his mother around a hallway corner when police arrived and was shot immediately in the chest, according to reports.
Lawyer Carlos Moore said the lawsuit names the City of Indianola, Mississippi, and Officer Greg Capers.
"The lawsuit alleges negligence, excessive force, and violation of the boy's constitutional rights," a release from the law firm said.
Over the weekend Moore explained, "I think they shot first and asked questions second. He doesn’t appear to be a man or anything. He’s a 4-foot-10 little boy.""
"With living in the South, Mississippi, especially, sometimes you feel that you can trust the police a little more when they [are] your own color, your own race," Moore said, speaking to Good Morning America. "But now this man, this young boy, would never trust law enforcement again."
Murry survived the shooting with a collapsed his lung and a cut liver, ABC News reported.
Speaking about the case to MSNBC's Chris Jansing, Danny Cevallos said that what will be the most important part of the case isn't in the lawsuit.
"It is what will happen afterward," he explained. "And that's why this case will almost certainly not go to trial because that would require in this, which is a standard Section 1983 claim, a federal law creates a remedy or a right of law to bring a lawsuit for violations of constitutional or federal statutory rights.
"This complaint alleges very standard claims when it comes to excessive force, usually covered by the Fourth Amendment. Now, do the police defendants here want to go to trial or do they want to try to actually assert qualified immunity? Yes, qualified immunity protects many officers from actions like this, but practically speaking. Optics: do you want to be arguing that the actions of this officer were objectively reasonable in court when you have a plaintiff like this, like this child?"
Jansing cut in to say that it is overwhelmingly clear that Aderrien was a child.
"Exactly right," agreed Cevallos. "All of those facts and especially to the extent they are born out, say by a body-worn camera, or other witness testimony, which we don't know completely yet. The case would have to go through discovery. But if I was advising the city defendants here and the municipalities, I would say this is not a case you take to trial. This is a case you settle.
"Even if you think that you can win on qualified immunity. And I have to tell you, I handle these cases, and qualified immunity is remarkably easy for police defendants to make out. In essence, the test is, would a police officer in his or her right mind have thought that this was the right thing to do? In other words, you have to prove that it was not just unreasonable to this officer but unreasonable to every officer everywhere that this action was the wrong thing to do. That's a hard thing to prove."
See the analysis from Cevallos below or at the link here.
federal lawsuit for 11-year-old Aderrien Murry youtu.be
CONTINUE READING
Show less
In Arizona, far-right Rep. Paul Gosar is a polarizing figure even among fellow Republicans. Traditional McCain and Reagan conservatives have been highly critical of him, but MAGA Republicans who admire far-right figures like Kari Lake, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Georgia) and Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Arizona) tend to be Gosar admirers as well.
In an article published by Talking Points Memo on May 30, journalist Haley Orion stresses that Gosar is so far to the right that some white nationalists and Neo-Nazis look up to him.
Orion notes that in an earlier article, TPM reported that Wade Searle, Gosar's digital director, appeared to be "involved with an interlinked group of social media profiles that were deeply enmeshed with white nationalist Nicholas Fuentes' viciously antisemitic Groyper movement."
Orion explains, "While the revelations in the story were significant, they weren't necessarily surprising. The Groypers are deeply hateful and grotesque, but Gosar has never been shy in his flirtation with various factions of the fascist far-right, including the Groypers' leader, Fuentes. Or, as Gosar himself has bragged in the past: 'I’m considered the most dangerous man in Congress.' A large swath of the far-right has, in turn, taken notice, with Gosar becoming a sort of hero in some corners."
In 2021, Gosar set off a major controversy when he posted a video that depicted violence against Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York). Gosar's defenders claimed she was overreaching, but his critics responding that depicting violence against a member of Congress is never acceptable.
Orion stresses that Gosar isn't afraid to associate with extremists.
"Gosar has lent his support to a broad coalition of far-right bigots and Christian supremacists: from the s***posting Groyper neo-Nazis to the camo-clad LARPers and hate groups to the suit-wearing, ultranationalist political elites at home and abroad," Orion notes. "He'll rile up the Arizona chapter of the Oath Keepers, telling them that the United States is already in a Civil War, 'we just haven't started shooting yet,' then repeat the same line in an interview with a well-documented neo-Nazi. He'll even associate with the conspiratorial, and often ridiculous, QAnon movement, tweeting out references to Q-drops — Gosar later said the tweet was sarcastic, though the tweet remains up to this day — and appearing at Q-friendly rallies."
CONTINUE READING
Show less
The scale of plastic pollution is growing, relentlessly. The world is producing twice as much plastic waste as two decades ago, reaching 353 million tonnes in 2019, according to OECD figures.
The vast majority goes into landfills, gets incinerated or is “mismanaged”, meaning left as litter or not correctly disposed of. Just 9 percent of plastic waste is recycled.
Ramping up plastic recycling might seem like a logical way to transform waste into a resource. But recent studies suggest that recycling plastic poses its own environmental and health risks, including the high levels of microplastics and harmful toxins produced by the recycling process that can be dangerous for people, animals and the environment.
Microplastics
“We found pretty scary amounts, to be honest,” said plastics scientist Erina Brown, lead author of a research paper into the microplastic run-off produced by recycling centers, published in May 2023.
The UK recycling centre at which Brown based her studies used large amounts of water (common practice in the recycling industry) to sort, shred and separate plastics before they were compounded and turned into pellets for resale.
Her research tested the rate of microplastics – plastic particles up to 5mm in size – released into the water through the process.
“There were 75 billion particles per metre cubed in the wash water,” she said. “About 6 percent of all the plastics that were coming into the facility were then being released into the water as microplastics, even with the filtration [system].”
Scientists are still researching the possible risks of microplastics on human health. They are thought to carry disease-causing organisms that act as a vector for diseases in the environment – where many plastic particles produced by recycling are likely to end up.
Water used in recycling centers around the world often passes through sewage treatment facilities, which “are just not designed to filter this size of microplastic”, Brown says.
Microplastics caught in sewage sludge are often inadvertently applied to fields as fertilizer, while those that remain in the treated water enter local streams and end up even farther afield – a study released in March showed microplastics from European rivers had spread to Arctic seas.
More than two-thirds of UN member states agreed in March last year to develop a legally binding agreement on plastic pollution by 2024, and the second round of meetings to draw up the treaty began on Monday in Paris and will run through Friday.
UN Environment Programme (UNEP), which is hosting the talks, released a roadmap to reduce plastic waste by 80 percent by 2040.
But some environmental groups have said the three key areas of action outlined – reusing, recycling and reorientation towards alternative materials – are a concession to the global plastics and petrochemicals industry as they downplay the need to reduce use of plastic altogether.
Recycled plastics pose greater risk
Microplastic release is not the only flaw in the system. Recycling plastics means working with unregulated toxic chemicals.
Plastics are made with as many as 13,000 chemicals, according to a UN report this month, and 3,200 of those have “hazardous properties” that could affect human health and the environment. Many more have never been assessed and may also be toxic, according to a report from Greenpeace released last week.
In addition, “only a very, very small portion of those chemicals are regulated globally”, said Therese Karlsson, science and technical adviser at the International Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN). “Since there's no transparency [in the market], there's no way for people to know which plastics contain toxic chemicals and which don't.”
The risk these chemicals pose increases among recycled plastics, as products with unknown compositions are heated and mixed together.
“The outcome is a completely unknown product that is reintroduced onto the market,” Karlsson said.
Greenpeace’s report also detailed increased health risks for recycling centre workers exposed to toxic chemicals, including long-term health conditions such as cancer and harm to reproductive systems.
It also found higher levels of toxic chemicals in recycled plastic than in their virgin counterparts, including kitchen utensils, children’s toys and food packaging.
The spread does not end there. “We've done studies on eggs that are close to places that recycle plastics and found that these chemicals are making their way into the food chain,” Karlsson said.
“Plastics can act as carriers of these chemicals even to really remote places.”
Soaring plastic production
The share of plastic waste that is recycled globally is expected to rise to 17 percent by 2060, according to figures from the OECD. But recycling more will not address a major issue: after being recycled once or twice, most plastics come to a dead end.
“There’s a myth with plastic recycling that if the quality is good enough the plastics can be recycled back into plastic bottles,” says Natalie Fée, the founder of City to Sea, a UK-based environmental charity.
“But as it goes through the system, it becomes lower- and lower-grade plastic. It's down-cycled into things like drain pipes or sometimes fleece clothing. But those items can't be recycled afterwards.”
It is therefore difficult to make the case that recycled plastic is a sustainable material, said Graham Forbes, Global Plastics Campaign leader at Greenpeace USA, in a statement this week.
“Plastics have no place in a circular economy. It’s clear that the only real solution to ending plastic pollution is to massively reduce plastic production.”
And it is impossible for increased recycling to keep pace with the amount of plastic waste being produced – which is expected to almost triple by 2060.
“There's no way that we can recycle our way out of this,” added Karlsson. “Not as it works today. Because today, plastic recycling is not working.”
This is something she hopes the treaty under discussion in Paris this week will address.
Coming into the talks in Paris, a 55-nation coalition called for restrictions on some hazardous chemicals and bans on problematic plastics products that are hard to recycle and often end up in nature.
Karlsson is attending the talks, and she sees reason for hope. “The plastics treaty is an incredible opportunity to protect human health and the environment from plastic pollution. Doing that would mean phasing out toxic chemicals from plastics, ensuring transparency across the plastic life cycle and also decreasing plastic production.”
CONTINUE READING
Show less
Copyright © 2023 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | Manage Preferences
For corrections contact corrections@rawstory.com, for support contact support@rawstory.com.
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}