truesee's Blog

Dangerous and illegal car surfing trend is growing among teens

PalmBeachPost.com  

Dangerous and illegal car surfing trend is growing among teens

Rochelle Ritchie

 

wptv.com

Updated: 7:29 a.m. Thursday, Feb. 24, 2011

Posted: 7:28 a.m. Thursday, Feb. 24, 2011

 

 

"Car Surfing," or "Ghost Riding" as it is also known, has taken roads by storm, turning dangerous highways into deadly ones. 

One man is saying it needs to stop. He spent three months in the hospital. After numerous surgeries and therapy sessions, he now wants to spread the word about this popular but dangerous tren

It was suppose to be for fun, but fun turned into tragedy after an almost-fatal accident.

20-year-old Andrew Collazo fell off the roof of a car while attempting to car surf with his friends. 

Car surfing is where one person climbs onto the roof of a car and begins to "surf" as if they were on water. 

Andrew doesn't remeber the accident that cracked his skull. He says after numerous surgeries, he was like a newborn baby. He had to learn how to talk, speak, walk, all over again. He also had to re-learn his parents, and family members. 

The stunt has become a YouTube sensation. The video was made right here in Palm Beach County on I-95 by Tim Wehage and his friend P.J.

"Not at all we are not promoting car surfing," says Tim Wehage. 

Their copycat idea sparked after seeing video of another YouTube guy car surfing and playing the guitar. Both videos are said to be fake. 

"He just wanted to see if he could do it because he recently bought programs that would let him do that," says Wehage. 

Andrew's father says no matter how fake the videos are, some people like his son, take what is fake and make it real. 

It's this dangerous thrill that cost Andrew not only time but also nearly cost him his life. 

"Think twice about going out to recreate these stunts," says Andrew's father 

"I would say don't try it. It could lead to death," says Colazzo. 

Car surfing is not only dangerous, but illegal. Andrew's father says the teen who was behind the wheel at the time of the accident would have faced manslaughter charges if Andrew had died.

 

LINK TO VIDEO:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/dangerous-and-illegal-car-surfing-trend-is-growing-1277766.html?cxntlid=cmg_cntnt_rss

Entry #4,008

Sheen launches tirade after 'Two and a Half Men' shuts down

Charlie Sheen blasts 'Two and a Half Men' creator Chuck Lorre after production on show shut down

Nancy Dillon
DAILY NEWS WEST COAST BUREAU CHIEF

Originally Published:Thursday, February 24th 2011, 7:19 PM
Updated: Thursday, February 24th 2011, 10:09 PM

Charlie Sheen had some harsh words for the Chuck Lorre, creator behind his hit CBS sitcom, 'Two and a Half Men.'

Ut/APCharlie Sheen had some harsh words for the Chuck Lorre, creator behind his hit CBS sitcom, 'Two and a Half Men.'

 

LOS ANGELES - CBS canceled production of "Two and a Half Men" for the rest of the season Thursday, quickly striking back at Charlie Sheen's venomous rant against the hit show's creator.

The hard partying star called his sitcom boss Chuck Lorre a "clown," "turd" - and a "contaminated little maggot." And he inexplicably harped on Lorre's Jewish birth name - "Chaim Levine."

"Based on the totality of Charlie Sheen's statements, conduct and condition, CBS and Warner Bros. Television have decided to discontinue production of 'Two and a Half Men' for the remainder of the season," the companies said in a statement released Thursday.

An undaunted Sheen immediately struck back in an open letter to TMZ.com.

"What does this say about Haim Levine after he tried to use his words to judge and attempt to degrade me," Sheen wrote.

"I gracefully ignored this folly for 177 shows ... I fire back once and this contaminated little maggot can't handle my power and can't handle the truth," he went on. "I wish him nothing but pain in his silly travels especially if they wind up in my octagon."

He boasted that he had "defeated this earthworm with my words" and implied that Lorre is lucky he didn't use his "fire breathing fists."

He implored his fans to rally around him.

"I urge all my beautiful and loyal fans who embraced this show for almost a decade to walk with me side-by-side as we march up the steps of justice to right this unconscionable wrong," Sheen wrote.

Hours earlier, Sheen, in a shocking and wide-ranging interview on a Los Angeles radio station, also insisted he can heal his addictions with his mind.

He declared he didn't need the "cult" of Alcoholics Anonymous, calling its many members a bunch of "sissies."

"I have a disease? Bull----. I cured it with my brain," he said, adding that he preferred the company of his girlfriends - a porn star and a marijuana magazine covergirl - to the "bootleg cult."

"I'm dealing with fools and trolls," Sheen said, describing the backlash to his recent party spiral.

"They lay down with their ugly wives in front of their ugly children and just look at their loser lives and then they look at me and say 'I can't process it," he told controversial radio host Alex Jones.

Jones, who believes 9/11 was an inside government job, was speechless.

Sheen then blasted Lorre for imposing a month-long production hiatus so the actor could recover from a bender than put him in the hospital.

"I embarrassed him in front of his children and the world by healing at a pace that his un-evolved mind cannot process," he said. "I've spent close to the last decade, I don't know, effortlessly and magically converting (his) tin cans into pure gold."

Entry #4,006

Fox News Chief Urged Employee to Lie

Fox News Chief, Roger Ailes, Urged Employee to Lie, Records Show

RUSS BUETTNER
February 24, 2011

It was an incendiary allegation — and a mystery of great intrigue in the media world: After the publishing powerhouse Judith Regan was fired by HarperCollins in 2006, she claimed that a senior executive at its parent company, News Corporation, had encouraged her to lie two years earlier to federal investigators who were vetting Bernard B. Kerik for the job of homeland security secretary.

Fred Prouser/Reuters

A News Corporation spokesman said Roger E. Ailes did not intend to influence Ms. Regan regarding an investigation.

Associated Press

The publisher Judith Regan said she had been told to lie.

Ms. Regan had once been involved in an affair with Mr. Kerik, the former New York City police commissioner whose mentor and supporter, former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, was in the nascent stages of a presidential campaign. The News Corporation executive, whom she did not name, wanted to protect Mr. Giuliani and conceal the affair, she said.

Now, court documents filed in a lawsuit make clear whom Ms. Regan was accusing of urging her to lie: Roger E. Ailes, the powerful chairman of Fox News and a longtime friend of Mr. Giuliani. What is more, the documents say that Ms. Regan taped the telephone call from Mr. Ailes in which Mr. Ailes discussed her relationship with Mr. Kerik.

It is unclear whether the existence of the tape played a role in News Corporation’s decision to move quickly to settle a wrongful termination suit filed by Ms. Regan, paying her $10.75 million in a confidential settlement reached two months after she filed it in 2007.

Depending on the specifics, the taped conversation could possibly rise to the level of conspiring to lie to federal officials, a federal crime, but prosecutors rarely pursue such cases, said Daniel C. Richman, a Columbia University law professor and a former federal prosecutor.

Of course, if it were to be released, the tape could be highly embarrassing to Mr. Ailes, a onetime adviser to Richard M. Nixon whom critics deride as a partisan who engineers Fox News coverage to advance Republicans and damage Democrats, something Fox has long denied. Mr. Ailes also had close ties with Mr. Giuliani, whom he advised in his first mayoral race. Mr. Giuliani officiated at Mr. Ailes’s wedding and intervened on his behalf when Fox News Channel was blocked from securing a cable station in the city.

In a statement released on Wednesday, a News Corporation spokeswoman did not deny that Mr. Ailes was the executive on the recording. But the spokeswoman, Teri Everett, said News Corporation had a letter from Ms. Regan “stating that Mr. Ailes did not intend to influence her with respect to a government investigation.” Ms. Everett added, “The matter is closed.”

Ms. Everett declined to release the letter, and Ms. Regan’s lawyer, Robert E. Brown, said the News Corporation’s description of the letter did not represent Ms. Regan’s complete statement.

The new documents emerged as part of a lawsuit filed in 2008 in which Ms. Regan’s former lawyers in the News Corporation case accused her of firing them on the eve of the settlement to avoid paying them a 25 percent contingency fee. The parties in that case signed an agreement to keep the records confidential, but it does not appear that an order sealing them was ever sent to the clerk at State Supreme Court in Manhattan, and the records were placed in the public case file.

Discussion of the recorded conversation with Mr. Ailes emerges in affidavits from Ms. Regan’s former lawyers who are seeking to document the work they did on her case and for which they argue they deserve the contingency fee. They describe consulting with a forensic audio expert about the tape.

No transcript of the conversation is in the court records.

But Brian C. Kerr, one of Ms. Regan’s former lawyers, describes in an affidavit the physical evidence he reviewed as “including a tape recording of a conversation between her and Roger Ailes, which is alluded to throughout the complaint” that Mr. Kerr and another lawyer, Seth Redniss, drafted for Ms. Regan. That complaint said News Corporation executives “were well aware that Regan had a personal relationship with Kerik.”

“In fact,” the complaint said, “a senior executive in the News Corporation organization told Regan that he believed she had information about Kerik that, if disclosed, would harm Giuliani’s presidential campaign. This executive advised Regan to lie to, and to withhold information from, investigators concerning Kerik.”

Mr. Redniss, in his affidavit, referred to “a recorded telephone call between Roger Ailes, the chairman of Fox News (a News Corp. company) and Regan, in which Mr. Ailes discussed with Regan her responses to questions regarding her personal relationship with Bernard Kerik.”

“The ‘Ailes’ matter became a focal point of our work,” Mr. Redniss continued.

The dispute involves a cast of well-known and outsize personalities; it also includes some New Yorkers who have had spectacular career meltdowns.

Mr. Kerik was sent to prison last year after pleading guilty to federal charges including tax fraud and lying to White House officials.

The law firm Ms. Regan hired to draft her complaint against News Corporation was headed by Marc S. Dreier, whose firm was cast into bankruptcy in 2008 when he was charged with a $100 million fraud scheme. The firm’s suit seeking the contingency fee from Ms. Regan is being led by the bankruptcy trustee handling the dissolution of the firm. Mr. Redniss was a co-counsel to the Dreier firm.

Ms. Regan’s own crash was remarkable in itself. While often controversial for her book choices, which ranged from literary novels to sex advice from a pornography star, her imprint at HarperCollins had become one of the more financially successful in the business.

The end came quickly in late 2006. Rupert Murdoch, the News Corporation chairman, was quoted saying  it had been “ill advised” for her to pursue “If I Did It,” a hypothetical murder confession byO.J. Simpson. A novel that included imagined drunken escapades by Mickey Mantle  drew another round of outrage.

Then News Corporation said Ms. Regan had been fired  because she made an anti-Semitic remark to a Jewish HarperCollins lawyer, Mark H. Jackson, in describing the internal campaign to fire her as a “Jewish cabal.”

In her 2007 suit, Ms. Regan said the book controversies had been trumped up and the anti-Semitic remark invented to discredit her, should she ever speak out about Mr. Kerik in ways that would harm Mr. Giuliani’s image. The new court documents expand upon that charge and link it to Mr. Ailes. Mr. Redniss wrote in an affidavit that Ms. Regan told him that Mr. Ailes sought to brand her as promiscuous and crazy.

“Regan believed that Ailes and News Corp. subsidiary Fox News had an interest in protecting Giuliani’s bid for the U.S. presidency,” he wrote.

In addition to serving as chairman of Fox News, Mr. Ailes has taken a broader role at News Corporation, including oversight of Fox’s local television stations and Fox Business Network.

As part of the settlement in January 2008, News Corporation  publicly retracted the allegation that Ms. Regan had made an anti-Semitic remark to Mr. Jackson.

The court records examined by The New York Times this week, which have subsequently been taken out of the public case file, also reveal another interesting footnote. After Ms. Regan fired her lawyers, a seemingly unlikely figure came forward to help settle the case: Susan Estrich, a law professor and a regular Fox commentator whose book Ms. Regan had published, according to Ms. Regan’s affidavit.

 

William K. Rashbaum contributed reporting.

 

Entry #4,005

For conservatives, Michelle Obama is fair game

For conservatives, Michelle Obama is fair game

Michele Bachmann, Andrew Breitbart, Michelle Obama, Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh are shown in a composite. | AP Photos
 
Clockwise from right: Bachmann, Breitbart, Palin and Limbaugh have all taken jabs.
AP Photos
 
AMIE PARNES | 2/24/11 7:43 PM EST

Except for an ill-advised trip to an expensive Spanish resort last summer, Michelle Obama has escaped much of the criticism that has been directed at her husband, keeping a relatively low-profile while primarily focusing on childhood obesity, military families and the arts.

During her first two years in the White House, she was more Laura Bush rather than Hillary Clinton, but that has begun to change. Now, for conservative critics, it is open season on the first lady.

Obama’s admonishments on nutrition and advice on breastfeeding are examples of big government “nanny state” intrusion according to Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.); her eating habits are evidence of her hypocrisy, according to Rush Limbaugh; her athletic physique is something to be lampooned on Andrew Breitbart’s Big Government website, which posted a cartoon showing her as overweight and eating a plate full of hamburgers.

To date, the East Wing has managed to stay above the fray, not wanting to take part in a point-counterpoint kind of debate. But to one academic expert on first ladies, the attacks seem unusually pointed.

“There’s so much anger in the criticism surrounding Michelle Obama,” said Myra Gutin, a Rider University professor who has a biography of Barbara Bush and a book on 20th century first ladies. “It seems almost personal to me.”

Republicans have a simple response: Obama is now fair game because she is playing an increasingly political role in her husband’s administration.

When Obama made a string of campaign stops for Democratic candidates during the 2010 campaign, Republicans generally refrained from any attacks. But many of them point to the first lady’s e-mail to supporters earlier this month announcing the news that Charlotte had been picked as the host city of the 2012 Democratic National Convention as an example of her slow movement onto political turf.

And they say her support for the government playing a bigger role in advancing better nutrition is inherently political. “If the first lady doesn’t want criticism, then she shouldn’t propose policy,” said Republican strategist Mark McKinnon.

“While no one disagrees with encouraging good health, against the backdrop of her husband’s demonstrably invasive and expanding government, the fear is that her encouragement will cross over to government fiat,” said Mary Matalin, a former aide to President George H.W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

In contrast to Hillary Clinton, who was put in charge of her husband Bill Clinton’s health care initiative shortly after he became president, Obama’s role in health care policy has been minimal. Clinton was an entirely new model of a first lady and quickly became a target of what she called “the vast right wing conspiracy” before dialing back her public involvement in policy after health care crashed and burned.

Republican strategist John Feehery said conservatives may be seizing on the fact that Michelle Obama, like Hillary Clinton, is perceived to be more liberal than her husband. But he sees a difference between the current first lady and Clinton, who was perceived as a “real ideological threat.”

“Michelle Obama isn’t heading up a health care task force,” Feehery said, referring to Clinton. “Michelle Obama is talking about issues that are relatively important. I think she’s a fairly traditional first lady.”

In that sense she has resembled her predecessor, Laura Bush, who promoted literacy and woman’s issues in Afghanistan as first lady, and never attracted much controversy.

“The thought of attacking [Laura Bush] was just not in the mainstream,” said Anita McBride, who served as Bush’s chief of staff. “I can’t really say she took a pounding on anything like this. Sure, she had her missteps but you really didn’t see much criticism. I think people saw her as someone who softened the president.”

Obama, a Harvard Law School graduate, was as accomplished as Clinton when she became first lady, but from the beginning sought a relatively low profile in the White House.

Asked by POLITICO recently asked if it’s a first lady’s role to delve into policy issues, Obama said: “We talked about this when I first came in, and I think every first lady has the right to—or the privilege of determining what their agenda will be and every first lady’s agenda is as different as every first lady.”

In her case, she made childhood obesity her main focus, though recently she has also spent time publicizing the needs of military families. Her kitchen garden and warnings about the dangers of junk food seemed fairly benign – at least in the beginning. But as the first lady began to talk specifics and a more policy-oriented role, her critics saw an opening.

Last summer, when she talked about telling her kids that “dessert is not a right,” it became an instant headline. Palin took a swipe at the line on her reality show as she made s’mores with her daughter. “This is in honor of Michelle Obama, who said the other day we should not have dessert,” she said.

Around the same time, the first lady took heat for taking the private trip to Spain as unemployment plagued millions of Americans.

Some expected the attacks to continue when she hit the campaign trail to stump for Democrats in the midterm elections last fall. But her role in the campaign did not become an issue.

Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University, said Obama “became an easier target” by becoming more political recently with the DNC announcement. “She made herself more political and thus fed these kinds of attacks,” he said.

Still, even the Charlotte comments were fairly innocuous.

“Vibrant, diverse and full of opportunity, the Queen City is home to innovative, hardworking folks with big hearts and open minds,” Obama wrote. “And of course, great barbecue.”

But some Republicans saw the move as political because as one Republican strategist put it, “a party convention is inherently political” and not something a first lady usually deals with. 

As Obama marked the first anniversary of the Let’s Move! campaign and began to ramp up efforts for the second year, the scrutiny that had largely escaped her became intense.

When the White House served up deep dish pizza and bratwurst at its Super Bowl party earlier this month, Obama was forced to answer questions about why.

“It’s about balance,” she told reporters during a luncheon at the White House earlier this month to mark the first anniversary of Let’s Move! “It’s always been about balance.”

At the luncheon, the first lady briefly mentioned breastfeeding and how children who are nursed “longer have a lower tendency to be obese.”

“We also want to focus on the important touch points in a child’s life. And what we’re learning now is that early intervention is key,” she said.

Her comments received wide coverage. At the same time, the Internal Revenue Service announced that costs for breast pumps would be eligible for tax breaks. And just like that, the story was on The Drudge Report.

The next day, Bachmann took the first swipe, criticizing Obama for trying to implement a “nanny state” based on her push to get mothers to breastfeed their children in order to help combat childhood obesity. Palin joined in two days later, taking a shot at the first lady while blaming her husband’s policies for the rising cost of commodities and items like milk.

“No wonder Michelle Obama is telling everybody, ‘You’d better breastfeed your baby,’” she said. In a column, Michelle Malkin also chimed in, saying that the first lady and her “food cops” aren’t “interested in slimming down kids’ waistlines but rather “boosting government and public union payrolls.”

Big Government then ran its cartoon portraying an overweight eating a plate full of hamburgers and French fries. And this week, after the first lady indugled in spareribs with her daughters over the holiday weekend in Colorado, Limbaugh weighed in – like Breitbart – on her appearance.

“I’m trying to say that our first lady does not project the image of women that you might see on the cover of the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue or of a woman Alex Rodriguez might date every six months or what have you,” Limbaugh said.

The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank wrote that Limbaugh was the right person to comment “being perhaps the finest example of the male form since Michelangelo sculpted David,” but the White House said nothing.

Not all Republicans think that attacking Obama is smart politics.

“Cheap shots against Michelle Obama are stupid,” Feehery said. “She’s a good first lady and I think that conservatives are better off keeping their focus on President Obama. There’s nothing I’ve seen from Michelle Obama that I’ve found offensive.”

And former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who has an interest in nutrition thanks to his own struggles with weight, was even more supportive.

“She’s been criticized…out of reflex rather than out of thoughtful expression,” he said Wednesday at a session with reporters in Washington. “It’s exactly what Republicans say they believe, which is you put an emphasis on personal responsibility…I thought that’s what we were about.”

  

Entry #4,004

'The most dangerous place for African Americans is in the womb billboard sparks outrage

Racial anti-abortion billboard in SoHo comes down amid outrage from pro-choice NYers, black leaders

Rich Schapiro
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Originally Published:Thursday, February 24th 2011, 4:10 PM
Updated: Thursday, February 24th 2011, 4:16 PM

The anti-abortion billboard that claims 'The most dangerous place for African Americans is in the womb,' is coming down - one day after it was put up, sparking local outrage.

The anti-abortion billboard that claims 'The most dangerous place for African Americans is in the womb,' is coming down - one day after it was put up, sparking local outrage.

A controversial anti-abortion billboard in SoHo equating abortion among black women with genocide is coming down.

The Rev. Al Sharpton says Lamar Outdoor advertising has agreed to yank the ad above Sixth Ave. and Watts St., which features a picture of a young black girl below the message, "The most dangerous place for African Americans is in the womb."

"The billboard was offensive, especially during Black History Month, and I had intended to hold a press conference Friday in front of the billboard to protest the message of racial profiling and against a woman"s right to choose," Sharpton said Thursday.

Life Always, the Texas-based anti-abortion group that sponsored the ad, said it hoped to raise public awarenewss of Planned Parenthood's "targeting of minority neighborhoods."

It was scheduled to remain in SoHo for three weeks.

Representatives for Life Always

Entry #4,003

How Huckabee might beat Obama in 2012

How Huckabee might beat Obama in 2012

 

Huckabee's biggest threat to Obama in the 2012 presidential race could be his claim that the economic recovery requires fixing America's broken family structure. But such views are not fully formed yet, which may be his weakness.

 



 

Monitor's Editorial Board

February 24, 2011

The latest Gallup poll indicates that Mike Huckabee is now the most popular of the possible GOP contenders to run against Barack Obama in 2012. And it just so happens that the former Arkansas governor is visiting Iowa this week – to tout his latest book but perhaps also to test the campaign waters.

The former Baptist minister was also quick on Wednesday to criticize President Obama for reversing his support of the Defense of Marriage Act. That 15-year-old law defines marriage as only between a man and a woman and effectively bans federal recognition of gay marriage.

Mr. Huckabee won the 2008 Iowa caucus against John McCain and, while later losing the GOP nomination, he has kept himself in the public eye, maneuvering among potential rivals such as Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney.

Politics aside, Huckabee offers an interesting policy challenge to Obama. He claims government can’t fix the slow economy and high unemployment unless America fixes its social structure. Families are the nation’s most basic form of government, he says, and they are falling apart.

Huckabee says absentee fathers, for example, cost the government some $300 billion a year in aid to single moms – not to mention the lost prosperity if those children are not raised to be ethical and productive citizens as a result of being from a broken family. He says two-thirds of children who live in poverty wouldn’t be in such a plight if their parents were married.

His basic pitch: No government program can do what parents must do in teaching the kind of personal responsibility that is essential to creating a good economy. And the rising costs of government are due in large measure to entitlement programs that pick up the pieces of broken families.

Such talk about “family values” is a far cry from the usual debate about job creation, which is focused on such steps as stimulating the housing market, providing cheap credits to banks, and subsidizing clean energy, fast trains, and Internet expansion.

Yet, as a recent poll for Politico revealed, 62 percent of Americans says “family values” are very important, compared with 23 percent among the Washington elite.

Huckabee is also challenging the tea party, which is focused on economic conservatism and ending big government. Social conservatives and cultural warriors like himself don’t want to become political relics from the Reagan era, when abortion was their prime issue. So they must find some linkage to economic revival.

It’s not a big leap, of course, to see the divorce rate, high levels of teen pregnancy, growing drug use, and other social ills as drags on the economy. But Huckabee falters in not also pointing out that a healthy economy can help reduce those social ills.

And he is not very specific on how big a role he wants for government to address family values. Banning abortion or making it more difficult to divorce is unlikely to happen, for example, while helping families through federal spending or rules on companies aren’t going to fly for now.

Like many conservatives in the debate about entitlement reform, Huckabee won’t say just how much of the government’s social safety net he would reduce even as he would also use government to try to keep families whole.

Yes, charity begins at home, but few people would want to end Social Security.

But then, if unemployment is still above 8 percent during the 2012 presidential race, Huckabee’s views could become more attractive, especially if they are refined and fleshed out. Obama would be vulnerable to Huckabee’s more fundamental view of what ails both society and the economy.

Huckabee hasn’t decided to run yet. But if he does, he may bring a new perspective on the nation’s tired economic debate.

 



LINK WILL THESE REPUBLICANS RUN IN 2012?

http://www.csmonitor.com/CSM-Photo-Galleries/CSM-Galleries/Election2012/Will-these-Republicans-run-in-2012

Entry #4,001

Man admits to assualting his mother and taking her dentures

Houston man admits beating mom, taking her dentures

 

BRIAN ROGERS
Houston Chronicle

Feb. 24, 2011, 6:12AM

photo 

 

Christopher Harding: Charged with with injury to a disabled person.

A Houston man was sentenced to three years probation after pleading guilty Wednesday to beating up his disabled mother and taking her dentures.   Christopher Harding, 23, was sentenced to deferred adjudication by state District Judge Randy Roll after admitting he grabbed her by the throat, pushed her down and hit her in the face.  "The defendant then used his free hand to pull out her upper dentures causing additional pain," court records show.Harding's attorney, Paul D. Valdivieso, said Harding was his disabled mother's caretaker and the two were arguing when the fight broke out on Feb. 10.  He said Harding took responsibility after being charged with injury to a disabled person, a state jail felony that carries a maximum of two years behind bars.   Valdivieso also said Harding would return the dentures or pay $500 in restitution.  Under deferred adjudication, Harding won't have a conviction on his record if he successfully completes probation.

 

LINK TO VIDEO:

http://www.click2houston.com/video/26919858/index.html

Entry #3,999

17 police officers charged in kickback scheme with towing company

More than 30 Baltimore police officers charged, suspended in towing scheme

Federal authorities say cops allegedly got kickbacks from towing operator

 

Justin Fenton, Peter Hermann and Julie Scharper

The Baltimore Sun 11:02 p.m. EST

February 23, 2011

Seventeen Baltimore police officers were charged Wednesday — and more than a dozen others suspended — in an extortion scheme in which officers are accused of receiving thousands of dollars in kickbacks for steering accident victims to a towing company that was not authorized to do business with the city.

Baltimore Police Commissioner Frederick H. Bealefeld III helped make the arrests, summoning the officers to the department's training academy under the guise of an equipment inspection. There, he and the special agent in charge of the FBI's Baltimore field office, Richard A. McFeely, lined them up and took their badges.

"I'm here to reclaim our badge," Bealefeld said he told them.

In a 41-page criminal complaint and afternoon news conference, federal authorities outlined a broad scheme in which the officers are accused of conspiring for two years with brothers Hernan Alexis Moreno Mejia and Edwin Javier Mejia, owners of Majestic Auto Repair Shop in Rosedale.

In all, more than 30 officers are accused of being involved in one of the department's largest scandals in recent memory. The arrests and suspensions will also effectively take a large number of officers off the streets at a time when the department is struggling to replenish its ranks after a rash of departures.

At least 14 officers who were not charged have been implicated in the investigation and will have suspension hearings Thursday afternoon, police said. The officers charged in the case could receive prison sentences of up to 20 years and up to $250,000 fines if convicted.

"I expect all City employees to serve the public with the highest level of integrity, and I will not tolerate criminal or unethical activity by any city employee," said Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake in a statement.

After a community meeting at Patterson High School in Southeast Baltimore, she told a group of reporters that she was "certainly disappointed" by the charges but was "gratified" that the such practices would not be tolerated.

A network of 13 towing companies, referred to as the "medallion towers," have contracts with the city, some for as long as three decades, to haul away cars involved in accidents or illegally parked on public right-of-ways. Majestic is not one of those companies.

Authorities allege that the officers involved, upon being dispatched to an accident, would contact one of the Majestic tow company owners by cell phone rather than allow drivers to use a company of their choice or calling one of the city's authorized companies.

If the Majestic owner wanted the car, the officer would then tell the driver that he knew a tow operator who could help save him money, provide a rental car and waive the insurance deductible. The complaint says the officer would persuade car owners to "not call their insurance company until after speaking" with the tow company.

The complaint alleges that the officer would then either falsify a police report, noting that the owner had requested his own tow company, or leave that box unchecked. For each car delivered, the court documents say, an officer received $300. One officer pocketed more than $14,000 over two years, according to Rod J. Rosenstein, the U.S. attorney for Maryland.

"Police officers are supposed to work for the Police Department, not the highest bidder," Rosenstein said.

The Baltimore case began with an internal investigation, which was handed off to the FBI, officials said.

Bealefeld told reporters at a news conference at the Maryland U.S. attorney's office that he thought for months about how he would explain the arrests to the residents of Baltimore. He said he wanted the arrests done in a "very deliberate way" that was "meaningful and respectful," but that also sent a stern message to the 3,000-member department.

Some have said they had long suspected and voiced concerns about towing companies not playing by the rules.

Paula Protani, who heads an association of the 13 medallion towing companies, said she had lodged numerous complaints about Majestic over the past three years — and at one point was arrested after confronting an officer at a crash scene, spending eight hours in Central Booking before being released without charges.

Protani provided to The Baltimore Sun a copy of the police report, which lists an arresting officer not named in the criminal complaint. Police said they were looking into the claim.

The medallion tow companies have contracts with the city that, in many cases, stretch back for decades. The companies pay a small annual licensing fee — Protani said it was around $500 — and have exclusive rights to tow cars that have been in accidents or are illegally parked in the city. The companies charge $130 to tow vehicles east of Charles Street and $140 to tow on the west side. The city does not receive a portion of the fee for the tows but collects money through tickets and storage fees.

Protani said she believes many other "gypsy" tow companies circumvent the city's tow rules, but that Majestic was the most egregious example.

"This gives all the good, honest tow companies out there a black eye," said Protani. "We're like lawyers — nobody likes a tow company until they need [one]."

No one was at Majestic on Wednesday afternoon, and a voice mail recording for the business confirmed it was closed. "There is a business emergency," the recording said, adding, "we promise to give everyone a call back."

Robert F. Cherry, president of the city's Fraternal Order of Police Lodge, could not be reached for comment Wednesday night.

Sgt. Carlos Vila, a member of the FOP's executive board and the head of the Latino officers' group, said that union was planning to support the officers.

"They're dues paying members and it's our obligation to support our members," Vila said. "At this point, these are just allegations. We'll be meeting very soon to discuss with our attorneys how we're going to proceed."

In court Wednesday afternoon, the officers were brought in no more than four at a time. The first four — Michael Lee Cross, Rafael Conception Feliciano Jr., Samuel Ocasio and Henry Yambo — were led into the courtroom in handcuffs by federal agents, and sat behind their attorneys, with whom they conferred as they flipped through the criminal complaint.

The officers were each released without having to post bail and without pre-trial supervision. Those with personal handguns and passports were ordered by U.S. Chief Magistrate Judge Paul Grimm to hand them over.

Defense attorneys said it was too early to discuss the case.

"Obviously, nothing is known at this point, and we have to find out what this case is supposed to be about," said defense attorney Thomas Saunders, who was appointed to represent Officer Jhonn S. Corona.

Some of the officers charged have received the department's highest honors in recent years. Officer Rodney Cintron received a Bronze Star in 2009 for helping arrest a man with a .22-caliber long-barrel revolver, while Corona received a Silver Star the same year after returning fire at a man who shot at a fellow officer.

Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said commanders plan to move officers from the Community Stabilization Unit to the Northeast District to make up for the disproportionate number of officers there who were suspended or charged. The commander retired this year, and the district has experienced the most homicides in the city so far this year.

The investigation dates to at least January 2009, records show. The investigation included wiretaps and surveillance of the tow truck company owners and their Rosedale lot.

In one exchange included in documents, Officer Rafael Concepcion Feliciano Jr. sent a text message to Moreno, one of Majestic's owners, that said: "Hey bro, did everything go through with both cars cause I need some cash today? Im tight with money and want to get some things before work later."

On Tuesday, police officials issued a bulletin asking the officers in question to report to the training academy. Upon being confronted by Bealefeld and McFeely, they were asked to hand over their badges, which were then turned over to an academy recruit who was allowed to witness the arrests.

The recruit lined them up on the floor as a demonstration to his classmates.

Bealefeld, a 30-year veteran of the city force, told reporters, "I know what service means."

Of the way the arrests were handled, the commissioner said, "You can consider the ramifications of that to infinity."

Baltimore Sun reporter Jessica Anderson contributed to this article.

 

LINK TO VIDEO:

 

http://www.baltimoresun.com/videobeta/a14ebebf-a8fc-489e-941f-fd68b8369cca/News/Police-towing-sting-nets-17-police-officers

Entry #3,997

Free pancakes at IHOP

Free pancakes at IHOP

Categories:
Dining Event

When: March 1st : 7 a.m. - 10 p.m.
Price: Free

View Website:

http://www.ihoppancakeday.com/ 

Description:

IHOP restaurants will celebrate National Pancake Day by offering a free shortstack of its famous buttermilk pancakes to each guest. In return, diners will be asked to donate to the Make-A-Wish Foundation

Entry #3,996

If a government shutdown occurs, what actually happens?

The Christian Science Monitor
If a government shutdown occurs, what actually happens?
Gail Russell Chaddock

Staff writer
February 23, 2011 at 3:19 pm EST

Washington —

House and Senate leaders are more than $60 billion apart on how much to spend or borrow to pay for government after March 4, when the funding for the current fiscal year runs out. If no one blinks, Washington could be headed toward a shutdown – the 16th since Jimmy Carter was president.

Most shutdowns lasted fewer than three days. One of the most famous, the standoff between President Bill Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich over balancing the federal budget – lasted 21 days, from Dec. 16, 1995, to Jan. 6, 1996. That shutdown furloughed some 800,000 federal workers; delayed processing of visas, passports, and other government applications; suspended cleanup at 600 toxic waste sites; and closed national museums and monuments as well as 368 national park sites – a loss to some 9 million visitors and the airline and tourist industries that service them.

It was, as Republicans had predicted, a “train wreck,” but it hit them hardest. Americans blamed the Republican House more than Mr. Clinton for provoking the shutdown, by a margin greater than 2 to 1.

Here’s what to expect, if Republicans and Democrats don't reconcile their differences on spending for the last half of this fiscal year:

Why must the government shut down? According to the Antideficiency Act of 1870, federal agencies and programs must cease operations if Congress and the president fail to enact funding, except in cases of emergency. The US government shut down six times between fiscal year 1977 and FY 1980, over periods ranging from eight to 17 days, according to the Congressional Research Service. From FY 1981 to FY 1995, there were nine shutdowns of lasting as long as three days. Funding for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1 extends only through March 4.

Is government prepared for a shutdown? Since 1980, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has required government agencies to submit plans for an “orderly shutdown.” The plans require agency heads to “limit their operations to minimum essential activities” and to reallocate funds to avoid interruption of services as long as possible. “Those plans are obviously updated accordingly, but they’ve been around for a long time,” said White House press secretary Jay Carney at a briefing on Tuesday.

Are members of Congress exempt from a shutdown? Yes, as is the president. That's because their compensation is financed by a resource other than annual appropriations, in this case, the US Constitution. Other excepted employees are those deemed to perform emergency work involving saving lives or protecting property, including military service, law enforcement, or direct provision of medical care, according to the most recent OMB directives, released in 2010. Sens. Barbara Boxer (D) of California and Robert Casey (D) of Pennsylvania last week proposed legislation to prohibit members of Congress and the president from being paid during a government shutdown, or retroactively. According to current law, furloughed federal workers are paid retroactively. The same protection does not apply to workers under federal contract or those whose jobs are disrupted by the shutdown.

Will I continue to get my Social Security check? The Social Security Administration kept nearly 5,000 employees on the job, about 7 percent of its workforce, during the fiscal year 1996 shutdown, on grounds that its funding is determined by an entitlement formula, not annual appropriations. But SSA later recalled some 50,000 employees to handle new claims and delays.

OMB officials say they are not responding to such hypothetical questions, because they don't expect a shutdown.

“As the part of the executive branch charged with overseeing the management of the federal government, OMB is prepared for any contingency as a matter of course – and so are all the agencies," said Kenneth Baer, OMB communications director, in a statement. "In fact, since 1980, all agencies have had to have a plan in case of a government shutdown, and they routinely update them. All of this is besides the point since, as the congressional leadership has said on a number of occasions and as the President has made clear, no one anticipates or wants a government shutdown."

Entry #3,995