吉林慢性睾丸炎吉林包皮切割整体费用,吉林哪个医院看男科更专业,吉林慢性前列腺炎哪个医院好,吉林哪家医院有治疗前列腺炎,吉林做包皮手术去哪个医院好,吉林做阳痿手术大概要多少钱,吉林在看阳痿术哪家医院好点

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah — South Salt Lake Police officers pitched in to replace a woman's American flag after they say she used it to fight off a home intruder on Monday.According to the department, 42-year-old Justin Scott Smith attempted to break into the woman's home shortly before 9 a.m.Police say when the suspect entered the front yard through the gate and assaulted multiple people, the woman grabbed the flag pole with the flag attached to defend herself and her family members. They say she hit the suspect multiple times, breaking the pole in the process, and the victims retreated into the home.Smith kicked the door in and continued to assault everyone inside, police say, before officers arrived and took him into custody.He was arrested on suspicion of assault, aggravated assault, aggravated burglary, and criminal mischief.After the incident, police say the woman was worried about desecrating the flag because the pole had broken and the flag had hit the ground, so officers took up a collection to replace it. (Photo courtesy South Salt Lake Police) This story was first reported by Spencer Burt at KSTU in Salt Lake City, Utah. 1174

SAN DIEGO (AP) — The sole suspect in a fatal shooting at a Southern California synagogue pleaded not guilty to federal hate crimes and other charges Tuesday.John T. Earnest entered the plea a week after a grand jury returned a 113-count indictment that largely mirrors a complaint filed shortly after his arrest on April 27. The indictment added four counts of using and carrying a firearm during commission of a violent crime.Earnest's parents attended the brief hearing but did not seem to exchange eye contact with their 19-year-old son. The suspect spoke only once, to acknowledge his name.Two days after the shooting, the family said their son's actions "were informed by people we do not know, and ideas we do not hold.""To our great shame, he is now part of the history of evil that has been perpetrated on Jewish people for centuries," they said in their only public statement since the shooting.Earnest looked blankly ahead as one of his attorneys argued that shackles should be removed from his wrists, ankles and waist during the hearing. Peter Ko, a prosecutor, countered, "He tried to commit mass murder," and the judge, Michael Berg, denied the defense request.Earnest also faces charges of murder and attempted murder for the attack on Chabad of Poway on the last day of Passover. One person died and three were injured.He is being represented by public defenders. His family is not paying his legal costs.Both federal and state crimes make him eligible for the death penalty if convicted but prosecutors have not said if they will seek it. 1563

SALT LAKE CITY — Some pornographic websites are beginning to comply with a new Utah law requiring that warning labels be attached to adult-oriented materials.At least three major porn sites — Pornhub, XTube and RedTube — have begun attaching an opt-in notification for visitors from Utah, which says that the state believes pornographic materials can be harmful if viewed by minors."It shows for a lot of businesses, they're more concerned about their pocketbook than they are about being prosecuted," said Rep. Brady Brammer, R-Highland, who sponsored the bill earlier this year.Brammer's bill got national attention, and he faced pushback and threats of lawsuits from the adult entertainment industry when it debuted earlier this year. XHamster, another adult website, even trolled the bill by posting a parody warning on its site for Utah viewers to see.Brammer watered down the original bill, and it passed the legislature. Utah Gov. Gary Herbert, a Republican, allowed it to go into law without his signature.The law allows people to bring a private civil action in court against a site for displaying "obscene" materials, but it would require someone to go to court and have something declared "obscene."A trade group representing the porn industry said it advises websites not to comply with the new law, believing it is still unconstitutional."No matter the message, the First Amendment restricts the government's ability to compel speech. Individual companies may choose to comply because it's easier than facing lawsuits or fines. We've never advised our members to comply, and don't believe this is being done in any widespread manner, but respect that a business may make decisions that limit potential liability," Mike Stabile, a spokesman for the Free Speech Coalition, said in an email. "As with similar, previous legislation in Utah, we'll eventually see the law challenged and overturned, and at no small expense to the Utah taxpayer. That's unfortunate, because that money and energy could be spent educating people about actually effective methods of protection, like parental filters."An email sent to Pornhub requesting comment on why it began posting warning labels was not immediately returned.While no websites have challenged the law in court, Brammer believes it will hold up."So far, it's been a lot of talk. I don't think that they will, if they do bring a legal challenge, I don't think they'll be able to succeed on that," Brammer said. "We have a difference of opinion on that. They haven't felt confident enough yet to bring a legal challenge and most of the companies, rather than make the challenge and spend the money on that, they're complying."Brammer said he ultimately would like to expand the legislation to allow for people to sue an adult website, even if they don't know who owns it.But he said he was not planning to bring that forward in the 2021 legislative session that begins in January. Other states have expressed interest in running similar legislation, he said.Brammer said the warning label law has already alerted parents when their child was re-directed to an adult site, and it's educated them about parental filters.He insisted his bill did not block adults from viewing pornography, just minors."If that's where they want to go, they're going to get there. And I'm not trying to stop that," he said. "But I'm giving them a chance if that's not where they want to go."This story was originally published by Ben Winslow on KSTU in Salt Lake City. 3510

SAN DIEGO (AP) — Scheduling glitches led an immigration judge to deny the Trump administration's request to order four Central American migrants deported because they failed to show for initial hearings Wednesday in the U.S. while being forced to wait in Mexico.The judge's refusal was a setback for the administration's highly touted initiative to make asylum seekers wait in Mexico while their cases wind through U.S. immigration courts.One migrant came to court with a notice to appear on Saturday, March 30 and said he later learned that he was supposed to show up Wednesday. He reported in the morning to U.S. authorities at the main crossing between San Diego and Tijuana."I almost didn't make it because I had two dates," he said.Similar snafus marred the first hearings last week when migrants who were initially told to show up Tuesday had their dates bumped up several days.Judge Scott Simpson told administration lawyers to file a brief by April 10 that explains how it can assure migrants are properly notified of appointments. The judge postponed initial appearances for the four no-shows to April 22, which raised more questions about how they would learn about the new date.Government documents had no street address for the four men in Tijuana and indicated that correspondence was to be sent to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Simpson asked how the administration would alert them."I don't have a response to that," said Robert Wities, an attorney for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.At least two others were given notices to appear Tuesday but, when they showed up at the border, were told by U.S. authorities that they were not on the schedule that day. Their attorneys quickly got new dates for Wednesday but Mexico refused to take them back, forcing them to stay overnight in U.S. custody.Laura Sanchez, an attorney for one of the men, said she called a court toll-free number to confirm her client's initial hearing Tuesday but his name didn't appear anywhere in the system. Later, she learned that it was Wednesday.Sanchez said after Wednesday's hearing that she didn't know if Mexico would take her client back. Mexican officials didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.Homeland Security Department representatives did not immediately respond to a request for comment late Wednesday.The snafus came two days before a federal judge in San Francisco hears oral arguments to halt enforcement of the "Migration Protection Protocols" policy in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, Southern Poverty Law Center and Center for Gender & Refugee Studies.The policy shift, which followed months of high-level talks between the U.S. and Mexico, was launched in San Diego on Jan. 29 amid growing numbers of asylum-seeking families from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. Mexicans and children traveling alone are exempt.Families are typically released in the U.S. with notices to appear in court and stay until their cases are resolved, which can take years. The new policy aims to change that by making people wait in Mexico, though it is off to a modest start with 240 migrants being sent back to Tijuana from San Diego in the first six weeks. U.S. officials say they plan to sharply expand the policy across the entire border.Mexican officials have expressed concern about what both governments say is a unilateral move by the Trump administration but has allowed asylum seekers to wait in Mexico with humanitarian visas.U.S. officials call the new policy an unprecedented effort that aims to discourage weak asylum claims and reduce a court backlog of more than 800,000 cases.Several migrants who appeared Wednesday said they fear that waiting in Mexico for their next hearings would jeopardize their personal safety. The government attorney said they would be interviewed by an asylum officer to determine if their concerns justified staying in the U.S.Some told the judge they struggled to find attorneys and were granted more time to find one. Asylum seekers are entitled to legal representation but not at government expense.U.S. authorities give migrants who are returned to Mexico a list of no-cost legal providers in the U.S. but some migrants told the judge that calls went unanswered or they were told that services were unavailable from Mexico.A 48-year-old man said under the judge's questioning that he had headaches and throat ailments. The judge noted that migrants with medical issues are exempt from waiting in Mexico and ordered a medical exam.___Associated Press writer Maria Verza in Mexico City contributed to this report. 4614

SAN DIEGO (CNS) - A 30-year-old man was killed when he lost control of his motorcycle and crashed into a fire hydrant in a neighborhood north of Scripps Ranch.The crash was reported around 4:20 p.m. Wednesday on Stonebridge Parkway near Stockwood Cove, off Pomerado Road in the Rancho Encantada neighborhood, San Diego police Officer John Buttle said.The victim was riding his 2019 Indian Scout motorcycle between 80-100 mph eastbound on Stonebridge Parkway when he lost control at a curve in the road, jumped the curb and slammed into a fire hydrant, Buttle said.The rider was ejected onto the roadway and pronounced dead at the scene, he said. The man's name was withheld pending family notification. 710