山东省哪家医院看羊羔疯病能去根(德州治癫痫病需要花多少钱) (今日更新中)

The death of a 22-year-old African-American man shortly after a struggle with police last week has been ruled a homicide, authorities in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana said Monday.Keeven Robinson, of Metairie, died last Thursday, following a police chase and an altercation with narcotics detectives from the Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office, located outside of New Orleans, according to authorities.An initial autopsy found significant traumatic injuries to the soft tissue of Robinson's neck, said Jefferson Parish Coroner Dr. Gerry Cvitanovich, who cautioned that the results from the autopsy, which was conducted Saturday, are preliminary and more tests need to be conducted.Cvitanovich said the findings are consistent with compressional asphyxia, which will likely be cause of death at the end of the process.The four detectives involved in the incident are white, said Sheriff Joseph P. Lopinto, who declined to release their names at this point."I understand ... this investigation will be under a microscope, understand it fully," Lopinto told reporters.Gaylor Spiller, president of the West Jefferson Parish NAACP branch, said Robinson's family is also seeking a second independent autopsy."I like the fact that Sheriff Lopinto stepped up to plate, and he's doing his part," Spiller said, according CNN affiliate WDSU. "He knows that the NAACP will be on his trail."Robinson was being investigated by narcotics detectives early Thursday, Lt. Jason Rivarde, spokesman for Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office, told CNN.Undercover detectives assigned to the case tracked Robinson down at a local gas station and tried to arrest him, according to Rivarde. But Robinson jumped back in his vehicle and led police on a chase after spotting them, Rivarde said.The suspect rammed several police cars before crashing his vehicle, according to Rivarde.Robinson took off on foot, jumping several fences before deputies caught him in a backyard of a nearby residential neighborhood, Rivarde said.Rivarde says a struggle ensued with deputies who eventually handcuffed Robinson. Once handcuffed, detectives noticed Robinson was not breathing, Rivarde said. Detectives administered life saving techniques before Robinson was taken to a local hospital where he died, Rivarde said.The agency is not equipped with body cameras or dash cameras, according to Rivarde."They were in a struggle," Lopinto said. "They used force." He added that the officers admitted to using force during the arrest.But the sheriff said he's "not coming to the conclusion that this was a chokehold."Lopinto said he contacted the Louisiana State Police on Saturday after he was told of the initial findings, and asked them to assist in the investigation.The sheriff said he has "every faith" in his officers to do their job well."I know they have the expertise because this is what they do every day, but I also understand that an independent set of eyes is something that's appropriate in a case like this," he said.The four detectives involved in the arrest were read their rights and have given statements, Lopinto said.They are being reassigned to administrative duty pending the outcome of the investigation, the sheriff's said.The FBI's Civil Rights Task force is also looking into the matter after he contacted them Saturday, the sheriff said.The actions of the coroner's office were largely praised Monday by Robinson's family.Hester Hilliard, an attorney for Robinson's family, thanked the coroner's office "for their professionalism and their transparency.""Today is just as hard as Thursday for this family. They're grieving, and today they had to find out that Keeven lost his life at the hands of another," she said, according DSU. "And that's very, very hard for them.""Now, it's time for us to move on to making funeral arrangements for a 22-year-old that should not have died," she said.In an interview with CNN, Hilliard said she is hoping "to see the same justice for Keeven as with any other individual who has died at the hands of someone other than the police.""We are hoping for a thorough investigation, an arrest and prosecution of those that caused his death unjustifiably," she said. 4201

The election is days away, and ballots across the country are already being cast in person, via mail. Billed as one of the most important elections of our time, ABC 10News D.C. Correspondent Joe St. George joins us to talk about the presidential election, what to watch for in Thursday's dueling town halls, and to explain how Nevada and Arizona could play a major role in deciding our next president.You can join us at 9:30 a.m. for the conversation right here on our ABC 10News Facebook page. 502

The CEO of a skincare company has issued an apology after she accused a man of "defacing private property" by chalking the words "Black Lives Matter" on the building where he lives in San Francisco.The CEO of LAFACE skincare, Lisa Alexander, issued a public apology to James Juanillo, the man she accosted."The last 48 hours has taught me that my actions were those of someone who is not aware of the damage caused by being ignorant and naive to racial inequalities. When I watch the video I am shocked and sad that I behaved the way I did. It was disrespectful to Mr. Juanillo and I am deeply sorry for that," Alexander's statement read, in part.The video, posted to social media on Friday, shows Alexander and another man, later identified as Robert Larkin, speaking with Juanillo. In the video, Alexander accuses Juanillo of "defacing private property" as he stenciled "Black Lives Matter" in yellow chalk on a wall at his home.Alexander and Larkin told Jaunillo that he was "free to express his opinion," but "that was not the way to do it."Juanillo then asked if it would be OK if he were chalking his own property. Alexander and Larkin said that they knew Juanillo didn't own the property because they "knew who lived there."Juanillo encouraged Alexander and Larkin to call the police if they felt unsafe. Juanillo told KGO in San Francisco that the two did call the police, but when officers arrived, they quickly recognized Juanillo as a resident."I didn't even show (the police) my ID," Juanillo told KGO.KGO also spoke to one of the property owners, who said he does not know Alexander or Larkin.The video of the incident spread quickly on social media, with many referring to Alexander as a "Karen" — a slang term for an entitled woman, often used in the context of racism.Alexander's identity was not independently confirmed until she came forward to apologize. However, Birchbox — a makeup subscription service — released a statement on Twitter denouncing Alexander's actions after Twitter users brought the video to their attention. Birchbox said that it had not worked with LAFACE in "several years," but nonetheless had "officially cut ties with the company."The video also prompted trolls to leave negative Yelp reviews of a Los Angeles-based skincare store, My LA Face, which has no connection to Alexander or her business, LAFACE. A representative for Yelp told KGO that those negative reviews would be removed.Read Alexander's full statement below.I want to apologize directly to Mr. Juanillo. There are not enough words to describe how truly sorry I am for being disrespectful to him last Tuesday when I made the decision to question him about what he was doing in front of his home. I should have minded my own business.The last 48 hours has taught me that my actions were those of someone who is not aware of the damage caused by being ignorant and naive to racial inequalities. When I watch the video I am shocked and sad that I behaved the way I did. It was disrespectful to Mr. Juanillo and I am deeply sorry for that. I did not realize at the time that my actions were racist and have learned a painful lesson. I am taking a hard look at the meaning behind white privilege and am committed to growing from this experience. I would love to have coffee with Mr. Juanillo in our neighborhood so I can apologize in person and share a dialogue where I can continue to learn and grow and be a better person.Robert Larkin also issued an apology statement.Over the last two days, I have had my eyes opened wide to my own ignorance of racial inequity, and I have thought a lot about my own personal blind spots. I was wrong to question Mr. Juanillo, and I was wrong to call the neighborhood police watch. It was wrong, and I am profoundly sorry for treating him with disrespect.I have a lot to learn about how racism impacts people in their lives, daily, I have hurt my neighbor. I am full of regret and very sorry. I am hoping to meet with him soon to express my sincere apology and to ask for his forgiveness and guidance in helping me begin the journey towards being a kinder, more thoughtful and sensitive person. 4144

The deadliest shooting in Texas history could have claimed even more lives if it weren't for a local resident who confronted the gunman, and another man who helped chase down the shooter.The resident, whose name has not yet been released, ran out of his house barefoot and exchanged gunfire with the shooter before the gunman sped away in a pearl-colored Fort Explorer. The armed resident then hailed a man across the street and got in his truck, telling him to chase down the gunman."I had to catch the guy. I had to make sure he was caught and at that point the gentleman riding with me said you may have to use your truck to get him off the road and there was no hesitation. It was do everything necessary to make sure that this guy is stopped," the motorist, Johnnie Langendorff said.Hear everything Johnnie Langendorff had to say: At a news conference Sunday night, investigators offered a preliminary timeline of the attack at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs and laid out the role the resident played. Langendorff spoke to CNN on Monday.The gunman entered the small church in the rural town east of San Antonio, firing with an assault weapon at the congregation attending the morning service.A local resident grabbed his own rifle and engaged the gunman, said Freeman Martin, the regional director of the Texas Department of Public Safety."The suspect dropped his rifle, which was a Ruger AR assault-type rifle and fled from the church," said Martin."What do you say to the man who stepped up when he heard the gunshots? I'd say he's a hero," Wilson County Sheriff Joe Tackitt Jr. told CNN's Chris Cuomo on Monday. "I don't think there's any question about that. Had he not done what he did, we could have lost more people."He was just driving byLangendorff said he was driving by the church on the way to his girlfriend's house when he saw gunfire between the shooter and the armed resident.Langendorff told CNN that both men had weapons drawn."There was exchange of gunfire. It lasted just a few seconds, and the shooter got in his vehicle and took off," he said.The armed resident opened Langendorff's door, said the gunman shot up the church and urged the driver to step on it."We got to chase him," the man said, according to Langendorff. He said he answered, "Let's go."They gave chase in his truck for 11 miles and called police dispatch to tell them where they were and in what direction they were headed. The chase was 10 to 12 minutes long."The vehicle was in sight and I was picking up, getting closer and closer to it. We hit about 95 (mph) ... trying to catch this guy until he eventually lost control on his own and went off into the ditch," Langendorff told CNN affiliate KSAT."The gentleman that was with me got out and rested his rifle on my hood and kept it aimed at him (the shooter), telling him to get out. There was no movement, there was none of that. I just know his brake lights were going on and off, so he might've been unconscious from the crash or something like that. I'm not sure."Langendorff felt the suspect, who crashed his vehicle near the county line, "just gave up."When police arrived about five minutes later, they approached the suspect's vehicle and found the gunman inside dead of a bullet wound. He was later identified as Devin Patrick Kelley.Asked by CNN what he was thinking at the time, Langendorff said, "Nothing. Get him." Why? "Because that's what you do, you chase a bad guy."The shooting was a horrific tragedy, Langendorff said, but he hopes the families of the victims can sleep better knowing the shooter "was taken care of."And he has no regrets about throwing himself into such a dangerous situation."I hope that everyone affected is able to rest a little better knowing that this guy, he'll never breathe again. It doesn't serve it justice completely. But he won't hurt anyone else ever."Bravery seen at another church shootingLangendorff praised the resident for his quick action and called him "very much a hero."He emerged barefooted, grabbing his gun before he grabbed his shoes."He did absolutely the right thing, which was try to take him down at the scene," he said.The shooting at the church claimed 26 lives.Investigators "are continuing in their efforts as they put all the pieces of a very complex puzzle together to try to provide their community all the answers they need and deserve," Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said.It's the deadliest mass shooting in Texas history -- and the fifth deadliest in modern US history.The Sutherland Springs resident's actions echoed another man's act of bravery during a different church shooting earlier this year in Antioch, Tennessee.As the service at the Burnette Chapel Church of Christ was ending on September 24, a gunman -- whom police identified as 25-year-old Emanuel Kidega Samson -- entered the church with a pair of pistols and started firing. An usher at the church, Robert Engle, sprang into action -- struggling with the suspect, even as he was being pistol-whipped, police said."Mr. Samson didn't expect Mr. Engle to encounter him, to struggle with him, to try to stop the shooting," said Don Aaron, the spokesman for the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department.During the altercation, the gunman accidentally shot himself in the chest with his own weapon, police said.When the gunman fell, Engle, despite his head injuries, ran to his car and came back with a pistol of his own, police said.Engle, who has a permit for a handgun, then made sure Samson stayed on the ground until officers arrived, Aaron said.  5564

The first hearing in CNN and Jim Acosta's federal lawsuit against President Trump and several top White House aides lasted for two hours of tough questioning of both sides.At the conclusion of the hearing, Judge Timothy J. Kelly said he would announce his decision Thursday afternoon.CNN and Acosta are alleging that the White House's suspension of his press pass violates the First and Fifth Amendments.The hearing started around 3:40 p.m., Kelly began by probing CNN's arguments for the better part of an hour. Then he turned to questioning a lawyer representing the government.Lawyers for the network and Acosta asked for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction that would restore his press pass right away, arguing that time is of the essence because his rights are violated every day his pass is suspended.Kelly opened the hearing by quizzing CNN attorney Theodore Boutrous on the network's First Amendment claim and asking how the President's history of attacks on CNN should be viewed in the context of the lawsuit.Boutrous rattled off examples of Trump's missives against CNN, including his claim that the network is an "enemy of the people."Kelly expressed skepticism that this proves the Acosta ban is "content-based discrimination," as CNN is alleging.Kelly said there is some evidence that Acosta's conduct -- not his content -- led the White House to suspend his press pass.But Boutrous disputed that and said there "never will there be more evidence of facial discrimination and animus against an individual reporter" than in this case.Kelly said "we've all seen the clip" of the White House press conference where Trump and Acosta had a combative exchange last week. Kelly said that Acosta "continued speaking after his time expired" and "wouldn't give up his microphone" -- points that the Trump administration made in its briefs earlier Wednesday.Under questioning from the judge, Boutrous cited Trump's words to Acosta from the press conference, and said, "'Rudeness' is really a code word for 'I don't like you being an aggressive reporter.'"Kelly peppered CNN's attorney with hypotheticals as he tried to determine what a lawful move by the White House, responding to Acosta's actions, would look like."Could they let him keep the pass but tell him he couldn't come to presidential press conferences?" Kelly asked.Boutrous contended that even a partial response like that would be a violation of Acosta's First Amendment rights.Boutrous called the White House's move to revoke Acosta's hard pass "the definition of arbitrariness and capriciousness.""What are the standards?" Boutrous asked. "Rudeness is not a standard. If it were no one could have gone to the press conference."Boutrous separately brought up evidence that hadn't been available when CNN filed its suit: A fundraising email that the Trump campaign sent Wednesday.The email touted the decision to revoke Acosta's credentials and attacked CNN for what it called its "liberal bias." Boutrous said that by grouping that all together in the same breath, the email made it clear that it was Acosta's coverage and not his conduct at a press conference that triggered the revocation of his press pass.Kelly asked CNN's lawyers to state the company's position regarding the original White House accusation that Acosta placed his hands a White House intern as she tried to grab his microphone away."It's absolutely false," Boutrous said.Boutrous also pointed out that Trump administration never mentioned that accusation against Acosta in the 28-page brief that Justice Department lawyers filed with the court earlier on Wednesday."They've abandoned that" claim, Boutrous said.In his first question in a back and forth with the government, Kelly asked Justice Department attorney James Burnham to clear up the government's shifting rationale for revoking Acosta's pass."Why don't you set me straight," Kelly said. "Let me know what was the reason and address this issue of whether the government's reason has changed over time.""There doesn't need to be a reason because there's no First Amendment protection and the President has broad discretion," Burnham said.Still, Burnham called the White House's stated reasonings "pretty consistent throughout," and walked through a series of statements that the administration has made — from Trump's first comments at the press conference to Sanders' tweets announcing the revocation to the official statement put out Tuesday after CNN filed its suit.Burnham said Sanders' claim that Acosta had inappropriately touched a White House intern was not a part of their legal argument."We're not relying on that here and I don't think the White House is relying on that here," Burnham said.Burnham said that it would be perfectly legal for the White House to revoke a journalist's credentials if it didn't agree with their reporting.He made the assertion under questioning from Kelly, who asked him to state the administration's position in this hypothetical situation.The judge asked if the White House could essentially tell any individual journalist, "we don't like your reporting, so we're pulling your hard pass." Burnham replied, "as a matter of law... yes."Pressed again by the judge on Sanders' claim that Acosta had inappropriately touched the intern, Burnham said "we don't have a position" on that."The one consistent explanation," Burnham said, "is disorder at the press conference."Burnham contended that revoking Acosta's hard pass was not "viewpoint discrimination" — part of a legal threshold for a First Amendment claim."A single journalist's attempt to monopolize a press conference is not a viewpoint and revoking a hard pass in response to that is not viewpoint discrimination," Burnham said.Kelly tried to press for details about how Acosta's pass came to be revoked, asking Burnham who made the actual decision.Burnham said he didn't have any information beyond what had been filed in court documents: that the revocation was first announced by Sanders on November 7 and then "ratified" by Trump the next day."Do you have any information to suggest that it was anyone other than Ms. Sanders that made the decision?" Kelly asked."No, not that I'm offering today. I'm not denying it but I don't know anything beyond what's been filed," Burnham said.Later, Burnham argued that revoking Acosta's press pass does not infringe on his First Amendment rights because he can still call White House staffers for interviews or "catch them on their way out" of the building."I think the harm to the network is very small," Burnham said."Their cameras are still in there," he added.Burnham said CNN had made an "odd First Amendment injury" claim and suggested that Acosta could do his job "just as effectively" watching the President's appearances piped into a studio on CNN."The President never has to speak to Mr. Acosta again," Burnham said. "The President never has to give an interview to Mr. Acosta. And the President never has to call on Mr. Acosta at a press conference.""To be in a room where he has no right to speak... this seems to me like an odd First Amendment injury that we're talking about," Burnham said.Boutrous, the CNN attorney, fired back on rebuttal."That's not how reporters break stories. It's simply a fundamental misconception of journalism," Boutrous said, adding how unscheduled gaggles and source meetings throughout the White House amounted to "invaluable access."In a legal filing by the Justice Department on Wednesday, the White House asserted that it has "broad discretion" to pick and choose which journalists are given a permanent pass to cover it.That position is a sharp break with decades of tradition. Historically both Republican and Democratic administrations have had a permissive approach to press access, providing credentials both to big news organizations like CNN and obscure and fringe outlets.Acosta's suspension -— which took effect one week ago — is an unprecedented step. Journalism advocates say it could have a chilling effect on news coverage.CNN and Acosta's lawsuit was filed on Tuesday morning, nearly one week after Acosta was banned.Before the hearing began, CNN's lawyers said the case hinges on Acosta and CNN's First Amendment rights; the shifting rationales behind the ban; and the administration's failure to follow the federal regulations that pertain to press passes, an alleged violation of Fifth Amendment rights. The lawsuit asserts that this ban is really about Trump's dislike of Acosta.The "reasonable inference from defendants' conduct is that they have revoked Acosta's credentials as a form of content- and viewpoint-based discrimination and in retaliation for plaintiffs' exercise of protected First Amendment activity," CNN's lawsuit alleges.In addition to the temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction that CNN is seeking at the hearing, CNN and Acosta are also seeking what's known as "permanent relief." The lawsuit asks the judge to determine that Trump's action was "unconstitutional, in violation of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment." This could protect other reporters against similar actions in the future."If the press is not free to cover the news because its reporter is unjustly denied access, it is not free," former White House correspondent Sam Donaldson said in a declaration supporting CNN that was filed with the court on Tuesday. "And if denying access to a reporter an organization has chosen to represent it -- in effect asserting the president's right to take that choice away from a news organization and make it himself -- is permitted, then the press is not free."Ted Olson, a Republican heavyweight who successfully argued for George W. Bush in Bush v. Gore, is representing CNN, along with Boutrous — himself another prominent attorney — and the network's chief counsel, David Vigilante.Olson said Tuesday that while it was Acosta whose press pass was suspended this time, "this could happen to any journalist by any politician."He spoke forcefully against Trump's action. "The White House cannot get away with this," Olson said.Most of the country's major news organizations have sided with CNN through statements and plan to file friend-of-the-court briefs. 10291

来源：资阳报