濮阳东方妇科医院做人流口碑很好放心(濮阳东方妇科咨询中心) (今日更新中)

Ronald Gasser will spend the next 30 years behind bars for shooting former NFL star Joe McKnight.Gasser faced up to 40 years in prison after his conviction of manslaughter in January of this year.He was arrested on a manslaughter charge Dec. 5, 2016, a few days after the shooting, and charged with killing McKnight at a busy intersection in Terrytown, Louisiana following a road rage incident.He was later indicted on a second-degree murder charge.During the trial, prosecutors painted Gasser as the aggressor in the deadly encounter.Today, Judge Ellen Kovach said the fatal road rage incident should serve as a cautionary tale.If Gasser and McKnight had disengaged, or if Gasser hadn’t decided to use his firearm, both could have walked away.“This tragedy did not need to happen,” Kovach said.The mother of Joe McKnight's son, Michelle Quick, yelled out that's "less than he deserves." And she cursed as she was escorted out of the courtroom. Quick and other family and friends read emotional, tear-filled impact statements before the sentencing.Joe Mcknight's mother, Jennifer McKnight spoke last. She stood in front of the courtroom and immediately started crying. She did not read from a paper. She looked right at Gasser, almost the entire time. She said when she found out she prayed "Lord not my child."She also told Gasser: "You took that part of me. You put pain on me I am not able to endure. I have to forgive you to have some sort of peace to live my life."Quick also took the stand. She says McKnight and her 7-year-old son Jayden -- called his Dad's phone after learning of his death. He left a voicemail. He asked his mom if dad could hear it from heaven. He asked if he could watch his dad's highlights on YouTube. When he went to watch a video, a clip of his dad's body on the ground came up. She did ask the judge for the maximum sentence of 40 years.Gasser gave no response. He sat in an orange jumpsuit, frequently looking down at his hands.Outside of the courtroom Jennifer McKnight told the press "He feels no remorse." 2050

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Two major law enforcement organizations have dropped their opposition to California legislation that strengthens standards for when officers can use of deadly force, a shift that comes after supporters made changes to the measure.Spokesmen for organizations representing California police chiefs and rank-and-file officers told The Associated Press on Thursday that they won't fight the measure, which was prompted by public outrage over fatal police shootings.As originally written, the measure would bar police from using lethal force unless it is "necessary" to defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to officers or bystanders.That's a change from the current standard, which lets officers kill if they have "reasonable" fear they or others are in imminent danger. The threshold made it rare for officers to be charged following a shooting and rarer still for them to be convicted."With so many unnecessary deaths, I think everyone agrees that we need to change how deadly force is used in California," said Democratic Assemblywoman Shirley Weber of San Diego, who wrote the measure. "We can now move a policy forward that will save lives and change the culture of policing in California."Law enforcement officials did not immediately explain their decision. But a revised version of the bill filed Thursday drops an explicit definition of "necessary" that was in the original version. The deleted language provided that officers could act when there is "no reasonable alternative."The amended measure also makes it clear that officers are not required to retreat or back down in the face of a suspect's resistance and officers don't lose their right to self-defense if they use "objectively reasonable force."Amendments also strip out a specific requirement that officers try to de-escalate confrontations before using deadly force but allows the courts to consider officers' actions leading up to fatal shootings, said Peter Bibring, police practices director for the American Civil Liberties Union of California, which proposed the bill and negotiated the changes."By requiring that officers use force only when necessary and examining their conduct leading up to use of force, the courts can still consider whether officers needlessly escalated a situation or failed to use de-escalation tactics that could have avoided a shooting," he said.Even with the changes, the ACLU considers the bill to have the strongest language of any in the country.Democratic leaders in the Legislature signed on to the revised version, which is set for a key Assembly vote next week. 2634

RIO LINDA, Calif. – A man dressed as Santa had to be rescued in California after his powered paraglider got tangled in power lines.Sacramento firefighters responded to the unusual incident in Rio Linda after receiving multiple reports around 1 p.m. Sunday.Eventually, crews were able to free jolly old Saint Nicholas and his “hyper light” from the lines. Luckily, he wasn’t injured, according to Metro Fire Sacramento.“We are happy to report Santa is uninjured and will be ready for Christmas next week, but perhaps with a new sleigh!” wrote the fire department on Twitter.We are happy to report #Santa is uninjured and will be ready for #Christmas next week, but perhaps with a new sleigh! pic.twitter.com/muYQex4zYU— Metro Fire of Sacramento (@metrofirepio) December 20, 2020 California Highway Patrol – North Sacramento posted photos of the entangled Santa on Facebook, saying their don’t typically respond to “Rudolph lane-changed me” calls, but after multiple reports, it was best to check things out.“Turns out Santa was trying to get some last-minute fun in before the holiday and got into a hot wire situation,” wrote CHP. 1138

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KGTV) -- A proposition that would authorize billions for California educational facilities will appear on the March 2020 ballot. Proposition 13 authorizes a billion bond that would go to preschool and K-12 schools as well as universities and community colleges, according to Ballotpedia. A total of billion would be used for preschool and K-12 schools while billion will go to universities. Meanwhile, billion is set aside for community colleges. The California Legislative Analyst says the state would pay billion in total - billion in principal and billion in interest. The payments would be made over 35 years from the General Fund, Ballotpedia says. RELATED: Here's what happens if voters approve Measure B - Newland SierraThe analysis also shows that Prop 13 would cost taxpayers an additional 0 million per year for 35 years. According to Cal Matters, those in favor of the measure, including Governor Gavin Newsom, say it will focus on modernizing schools as opposed to new construction. Those against proposition 13, including the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, say it would cause an increase in local property taxes and add to state debt and interest costs. “Like all bond debt, that must be paid ahead of any other priorities, even law enforcement,” the association says. “If there is a recession, too much debt puts us at risk of a reduction in services or demands for emergency tax increases at the worst possible time.”RELATED: Here's what happens if Measure C passesClick here to read more from the association. A “yes” vote supports proposition 13 while a “no” vote opposes the measure. Check out the breakdown below of how the money would be spent if approved: billion for preschool and K-12.8 billion for new construction of school facilities.2 billion for modernization of school facilities0 million for providing school facilities to charter schools0 million for facilities for career and technical education programs billion for universities billion for capital outlay financing needs of the California State Universities billion for capital outlay financing needs of the University of California and Hastings College of LawCommunity colleges billion billion for capital outlay financing needs of community colleges 2322

REXBURG, Idaho — Officials at BYU-Idaho are warning students about intentionally contracting COVID-19 in order to sell their plasma.In a news release issued Monday, the school says it is "deeply troubled" over reports that university students may be exposing themselves to the virus in order to contract it and sell the plasma that contains COVID-19 antibodies."The university condemns this behavior and is actively seeking evidence of any such conduct among our student body," the statement read. "Students who are determined to have intentionally exposed themselves or others to the virus will be immediately suspended from the university and may be permanently dismissed."Despite the warning, there has been no confirmation that any BYU-Idaho student has intentionally exposed themselves to COVID-19."We have been made aware of this information but at this point, it is only just rumors," said Mimi Taylor of Eastern Idaho Public Health. "We obviously do not support this type of behavior as it poses a risk to public health."EastIdahoNews.com reported earlier in October that plasma centers in the Rexburg area were offering more cash for those who have the COVID-19 antibody.The school also said it is monitoring rising COVID-19 trends in Idaho and Madison County. Should cases rise, the university may move to fully-online learning."We urge all members of the campus community to act respectfully and responsibly by observing all public health and university protocols and placing the well-being of others above personal benefit or convenience," the statement continued.This story was originally published by staff at KSTU. 1637

来源：资阳报