SELECCIONA EL MES

ADVERTISEMENT 2

ADVERTISEMENT 3

Error: No articles to display

ADVERTISEMENT 1

ADVERTISEMENT 4

DOVER, Del. (AP) —
    Federal and state authorities have charged a uniformed Secret Service officer from Maryland with sending obscene images and texts to someone he thought was a young Delaware girl, sometimes sending online communications while on duty at the White House.
    Unbeknownst to Lee Robert Moore, 37, the person he thought was a 14-year-old girl was actually an undercover Delaware police officer.
    According to a complaint unsealed Thursday in federal court in Wilmington, Moore surrendered to Maryland State Police on Monday after being placed on administrative leave last week.
    Moore is charged in federal court with attempted transfer of obscene material to a minor. He also faces a state court preliminary hearing Friday on two counts of sexual solicitation of a child under 18 and one count of providing obscene material to a person under 18.
    According to the federal complaint, Moore often engaged in online chats while on duty, once asking the undercover officer to send him something "exciting" one day when he was checking IDs for building entrance and complained that "work sucks today."
    It was not immediately clear Thursday whether Moore had hired an attorney.
    In an emailed statement Thursday, the agency said the matter was reported to its Office of Professional Responsibility on Nov. 6. It said Moore's security clearance was suspended that same day, his Secret Service-issued equipment was retrieved, his access to Secret Service facilities was terminated and he was placed on leave.
    "The Secret Service takes allegations of potential criminal activity extremely seriously," the agency said in the statement.
    Moore's arrest is the latest embarrassment for the Secret Service, which is charged with protecting the president and his family. The agency has been plagued by a series of scandals stretching back to 2012 when more than a dozen agents and officers were implicated in hiring prostitutes during a South American presidential trip. Since then, multiple agents and officers have been accused of wrongdoing, and the agency's management has been overhauled.
    According to federal authorities, an undercover Delaware State Police detective posing as a 14-year-old girl on the social media application "Meet24" was contacted in August by another person who used the screen name "Rob" and said he was a 30-year-old man from Maryland. They subsequently agreed to communicate using the social media app "Kik," which allows the exchange of images and videos.
    "Moore soon moved the chats sexual," Detective Kevin McKay wrote in an affidavit. "He stated he wanted to travel to Delaware and meet in person for sex. Moore made it clear that he knew I was a 14 yr old girl."
    The affidavit, as well as the federal complaint, go on to describe graphic communications that Moore allegedly had with undercover officers, including sending a picture of his erect penis on Oct. 6. Two days later, according to the complaint, Moore informed a female undercover officer that he was going to be overseas for a few weeks. He sent her a message on Oct. 26 saying he had returned from his trip.
    On Nov. 8, after being told he was being placed on leave and ordered by the Secret Service to report to a Maryland State Police barracks in Centerville, Moore sent a final message to the female undercover trooper.
    "I don't think we should talk anymore," he wrote.
    According to the federal complaint, Moore admitted after being taken into custody that he had taken and sent the explicit picture showing an erect penis. He also admitted that he had communicated with other "Meet24" users he thought to be minor girls.
    "In particular, Moore stated that he had an (sic) sexual interest in 14 year-old females and had engaged such individuals in online chats about sexual matters," wrote Patrick McCall, a special agent with Homeland Security Investigations.

Read more...

LOS ANGELES (AP) —
    At William Mead Homes, where people live in 415 tidy if aging red-brick apartments on the edge of downtown Los Angeles, opinions on the federal government's proposed ban on smoking both inside and outside of all public housing are about as plentiful as the scores of cigarette butts dotting the complex's numerous green common lawns.
    How will the government enforce such a wide-reaching possible regulation as the one proposed Thursday, smokers and non-smokers alike asked.
    And whatever happened to the rights of people to do whatever they want in their own homes as long as they aren't breaking the law, opined others.
    "Do you really think the police are going to come into peoples' homes because they're smoking? I don't," said 21-year-old Aaron Castaneda, who grew up in the warren of two-story apartments built during World War II and now hemmed in by railroad tracks and warehouses.
    "If people pay their rent, why can't they smoke in their own house?" asked Castenada, a self-described light tobacco smoker who was carrying a pouch of roll-your-own with him Thursday.
    Daniel Ramirez, a 16-year-old aspiring actor, felt differently.
    "I think we all know smoking is a bad thing. I don't smoke, and I don't want people to smoke around me," he said as he stood on a common front lawn littered with cigarette butts.
    "People have privacy rights if they're over 18," he continued. "But if there are kids in the house, smoking is not good for them and it's got to go. So yeah, I support a ban."
    The issue of children's safety also seemed to be a keystone in the government's move to get smoking out of public housing.
    "Everyone — no matter where they live — deserves a chance to grow up in a healthy, smoke-free home," said the surgeon general, Dr. Vivek Murthy. "There is no safe level of secondhand smoke."
    Smoking is already banned in about 20 percent of the nation's federally subsidized housing. The Department of Housing and Urban Development wants to extend that to the other 940,000 units around the country, in cities such as Los Angeles, New York, Atlanta and Miami.
    HUD Secretary Julian Castro said a nationwide ban would protect more than 760,000 children and save about $153 million a year in health care costs, repairs and preventable fires.
    The proposed rule would ban lit tobacco products — cigarettes, cigars or pipes — in all residences, indoor common areas and administrative offices. Smoking also would be prohibited outdoors within 25 feet of buildings. Electronic cigarettes that emit vapor but not smoke would not be subject to the ban.
    The public has 60 days to comment, and the ban would take effect 18 months after the rule is finalized.
    Ed Cabrera, a HUD spokesman in San Francisco, said the policy would probably become part of each lease agreement, and enforcement would depend largely on complaints by other residents.
    "Tenants who don't comply and continue to smoke could face possible eviction," he said.
    That's all well and good, said some residents of William Mead Homes, but they don't like the idea of ratting out tenants in a neighborhood that counts among its residents members of Dog Town, one of Los Angeles' oldest street gangs.
    "I'd be afraid to tell anyone to move away," said Maria Alvarez, noting that gang members frequently congregate on the lawn just outside the apartment she's lived in for 23 years to smoke both marijuana and tobacco. She said they and the police pretty much ignore each other.
    Some smokers, like Manuel Luna, say they would abide by the ban, however, noting it is indeed for the benefit of the large numbers of children who live in the neighborhood and frolic on its shiny playground equipment.
    "I already go outside to smoke," he said in Spanish.
    "And not because of the smell," his 21-year-old son, Manuel Jr., added in English. "He doesn't want any family members to get secondhand smoke.
    Still, this microcosm of American public housing reflected what a conflicting issue this could be.
    Luna's next-door neighbor, 77-year-old Juan Manuel Cabrera, said he's been smoking for 67 years and no federal edict is going to stop him now from lighting up inside the apartment he's called home for 28 years.
    "When I'm in my house I don't bother nobody and nobody bothers me," Cabrera said as he relaxed on his porch with his chubby brown Chihuahua, Dunko.
    An ashtray sat at arm's reach and a pack of Marlboro Lights was in his pocket.


Read more...

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) —
    The sister of a man who died after three police officers in a small Virginia town repeatedly shocked him with stun guns says the officers should be criminally charged so her family can find justice.
    "They need to face the justice system the right way," said Gwendolyn Smalls, the sister of 46-year-old Linwood R. Lambert Jr., who died in May 2013 while in police custody.
    Recently released videos show South Boston officers using stun guns on Lambert multiple times after they took him into custody and brought him to a hospital for a mental health evaluation.
    Instead of taking Lambert inside the ER, which was just steps away, police took him to jail, according to the videos, which were first obtained by MSNBC. An ambulance later brought Lambert back to the same hospital, where he was pronounced dead.
    No charges have been filed against the officers and they have said their use of force was necessary. Neither department nor the officers' attorney responded to requests for comment from The Associated Press on Thursday.
    Smalls, who saw the videos for the first time this week, said watching her brother die was heart wrenching.
    "How do you Taser a restrained person who needed medical attention?" she said.
    Lambert's family filed a $25 million lawsuit in April, accusing the officers of unlawfully arresting him and using "excessive, unreasonable and deadly force."
    The officers said in their response that the stun gun was "an appropriate and necessary use of force alternative to more harmful and lethal options available."
    An attorney for Lambert's family said the three officers were not disciplined and they have all since been promoted.
    The Virginia State Police investigated Lambert's death at the request of the police chief of South Boston, a town of about 8,000 people in southern Virginia near the North Carolina border. A state police spokeswoman declined to release the results of the investigation, which were turned over to the county's prosecutor for review in October 2013.
    Halifax County Commonwealth's Attorney Tracy Quackenbush Martin said her investigation remains open. She would not say when it might be complete.
    "It is imperative to reach the correct decision, and to reach it in a way that instills public confidence," she said in an email. "I will take as much time as necessary to make certain that my opinion is fully developed and is accurate."
    The officers, who are not identified in the lawsuit, first encountered Lambert when they responded to a noise complaint at a motel, according to court documents. Lambert was acting strangely, telling officers that he stabbed someone and that someone was after him.
    The officers handcuffed Lambert, but told him he was not under arrest and that they were taking him to the hospital, according to court documents.
    Once there, he kicked out the window and ran from the officers. They shocked him repeatedly in front of the ER doors and he fell to the ground. The officers yelled at Lambert to roll over on his stomach. One said: "I'm going to light you up again." Another warned he would "pop" him every time he got up.
    Lying on the ground, Lambert said: "Why are you trying to kill me, man?"
    The officers put Lambert back in the squad car and tell him he is being charged. While he is restrained the in backseat, the officers shock him again.
    South Boston Police Department's guidelines say officers may use stun guns in defense or to "temporarily immobilize" a subject. Their use is no longer justified once that person has been restrained or is under control, according to a copy of the department's guidelines as of May 2013.
    Lambert had several criminal convictions for driving violations and theft, records show.
    At one point in the video, Lambert told the officers that he used cocaine, and an autopsy said he died of "acute cocaine intoxication."
    Joe Messa, an attorney for Lambert's family, called that "laughable" and said the medical examiner's officer's would have ruled differently if it had known how many times Lambert had been shocked. Logs from the stun guns showed they were discharged 20 times, although it's unclear how many hit Lambert, Messa said.
    "Anyone who watches this videotape would not think it is outrageous or inappropriate to suggest that what these police officers did was tantamount to murder," Messa said.

Read more...

Rss Module

The News Gram Online. All rights reserved.

Register

User Registration
or Cancel