濮阳东方看妇科病评价很不错(濮阳东方医院男科治疗阳痿价格便宜) (今日更新中)

Millions of homeowners and renters have been struggling to make housing payments since March.“The latest census pulse survey shows about a third of renters have little to no confidence that they will be able to make rent,” said Alieza Durana with Princeton University’s Eviction Lab.It’s been tracking the affordable housing crisis in America, but particularly how that has manifested during this pandemic.“We have counted over 39,000 evictions between March and August,” said Durana.Those evictions took place because the CARES Act’s federal moratorium on eviction only covered tenants in properties with federally backed mortgages, which is estimated to be about a third of all renters.However, more than a month ago, even that partial protection expired, and millions of Americans have been lingering with concern over whether they can keep a roof over their heads.“In the absence of government intervention, it doesn’t look good,” said Durana.Late Tuesday afternoon, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a 37-page order that will ban evictions in order to reduce the spread of coronavirus. The order applies to owners and tenants of “any” residential property.However, there are a few important caveats.First, in order to be protected from eviction, you are required to provide your landlord with a signed copy of the declaration form that is located at the end of the CDC’s order.Secondly, on the form, you have to swear that your income is below the CDC’s outlined threshold and that you are unable to make full rent payment because of a substantial loss of household income. The CDC’s income threshold is ,000 for single filers and 8,000 for joint filers.Lastly, renters have to certify on the form that they will continue to pay whatever portion of their rent that is manageable and that they are aware whatever rent was not paid will still be owed in addition to late fees.The CDC’s order protects renters until the end of 2020, but it does not protect homeowners against foreclosures. So far, there is no mention from Congress or from the Trump Administration of help to landlords. 2128

MICHIGAN CITY, Ind. -- An infant left inside a baby box at a northern Indiana fire department is safe and being cared for. The child was left in the Coolspring Township Volunteer Fire Department's Safe Haven Baby Box in LaPorte County on Sunday. This was the second time in five months that the box has been used at this particular fire station, last November an infant was also left inside the box. “When this box was installed, we hoped that it would never be used," Coolspring Fire Chief Mike Pawlik said last November. "Yet we're thankful that it exists for cases just like the one."Baby boxes are safety incubators where mothers can anonymously surrender their newborn babies. The Safe Haven Law was authored by State Sen. Jim Merritt (R-Indianapolis) in 2000 and allows parents who feel they are unable to care for an infant that is less than 30 days old to leave the child with staff at a designated safe haven location with no questions asked. The Safe Haven Boxes give parents a way to leave the child anonymously without fear of arrest or prosecution“It is incredible to hear another infant’s life has been saved through the Safe Haven Law,” Merritt said. “This law provides overwhelmed parents with a safety net in a time of crisis, which could prevent the death of a baby. This is the second time in five months a baby has been discovered at this fire station, which shows people are aware of this law and this system is saving lives.”Last year, lawmakers approved a law allowing hospitals to install baby boxes where infants could be safely left inside. During the 2018 legislative session, the Indiana General Assembly passed Senate Enrolled Act 340,  which allows fire stations that are staffed 24 hours a day to use baby boxes. 1791

LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- The Louisville Metro Police Department's internal investigative files connected to the raid that killed Breonna Taylor have been released, Mayor Greg Fischer announced Wednesday.The files, compiled by LMPD's Public Integrity Unit, include thousands of pages of documents, more than 100 interviews, and at least 50 body camera videos.All of the files are connected to what happened on March 13, 2020, when officers tried to serve warrants on Taylor's apartment while investigating Taylor's ex-boyfriend, Jamarcus Glover, in a narcotics investigation..@LMPD has released the Public Integrity Unit’s investigative files on the Breonna Taylor case. pic.twitter.com/G096oDyiIR— Mayor Greg Fischer (@louisvillemayor) October 7, 2020 Taylor's boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, says he fired a "warning shot" at the officers, thinking they were intruders. Police returned fire and shot Taylor dead. No drugs were found in the home.Former LMPD Detective Brett Hankison was indicted on three counts of first-degree wanton endangerment for firing rounds into the apartment of Taylor's neighbors. None of the officers involved were charged specifically with Taylor's death.Last week, Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron released roughly 15 hours of recordings in the case.All of the investigative files can be found here.This story was originally published by Jordan Mickle at WLEX. 1395

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A third person who served on the grand jury that weighed charges against the police officers involved in the raid that led to the death of Breonna Taylor says she felt the investigation was incomplete.In an interview with The Associated Press, the woman said she thought prosecutors wanted only to give the officers involved "a slap on the wrist and close it up.""I felt like there should've been more charges," she told the AP in a phone interview.Taylor was killed on March 13 when officers conducted a narcotics raid on her apartment. Taylor's boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, said he drew a gun when he heard a pounding at the door. He maintains officers did not identify themselves and says he fired at officers when they breached the door, thinking they were intruders.Officers returned fire, killing Taylor. Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron, who investigated the case, said officers were justified in returning fire because they were fired upon first.While officers say they did identify themselves as police and say a witness in the building also testified that they heard police ID themselves, several of Taylor's neighbors are on record as saying they did not know who was at the door.One officer, Brett Hankison, was charged with a crime in connection with the incident. He faces three counts of wanton endangerment for firing his gun toward the apartment building following the raid. No officers faced charges in connection with Taylor's homicide."All of (the officers) went in blindly, you really couldn't see into that lady's apartment as they explained to us, there was just a TV on," the grand juror told the AP of Taylor's apartment. She added that officers "went in there like the O.K. Corral, wanted dead or alive."The grand juror told The Associated Press that she was surprised that they were not presented with the opportunity to consider other charges. She also took issue with Cameron's justification in September that grand jurors had "decided" not to charge the other officers with a crime."I felt like he was trying to throw the blame on somebody else, that he felt like, we as jurors, we weren't going to (speak) out," she told the AP. "He made it feel like it was all our fault, and it wasn't."Typically, grand jury proceedings are held in secret and details of their investigations are held tightly under wraps. But following Cameron's press conference, a judge issued a ruling that allowed grand jurors to speak publicly about the process. Two grand jurors have since come forward to express their frustrations with how the case was handled."I didn't feel that the family was getting justice," the grand juror said. 2674

Michigan State University is facing a federal lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan Southern District, accusing the school of not following federal guidelines in a reported rape.The lawsuit was filed by an attorney for a student who claims she was sexually assaulted by three members of the men's basketball team in April 2015, a week after the team lost to Duke in the NCAA Tournament.The team members are identified only as John Does in the lawsuit.According to the allegations in the suit, the unidentified woman was an 18-year-old in her first year at MSU at the time of the assault. She says she was with her roommate at Harper's Bar in East Lansing when most of the MSU basketball team arrived at the bar sometime after midnight on April 12, 2015.The woman alleges that one of the team members approached her and offered to buy her a drink. She says that after she accepted, the man asked if she would like to meet the "other guys" on the team.According to the lawsuit, the woman accepted because, as a sports journalism major, interacting with members of the basketball team was of interest to her.However, the lawsuit says that at no time did she indicate a romantic interest in any of the team members who approached her.As the night progressed, the lawsuit alleges that one of the team members asked the woman to come to their apartment for a party. She says that as incentive, one of the players lied and told her that her roommate was already headed to the party.According to the lawsuit, the woman contends she was having a hard time holding her glass, even though she had not had much to drink at that point.The lawsuit says that, when the woman arrived at the the location of the purported party, it turned out to be one of the team member's off-campus apartment and that few people were actually present. The lawsuit also says that the woman's roommate was not among those present.According to the lawsuit, the woman tried to text, but she was not able to control her thumbs to compose a text. It is at this point, according to the lawsuit, that the woman says the first player pulled her into a bedroom and told her "you are mine for the night." The woman says this made her uncomfortable and she made her way back into the living room, where, according to the lawsuit, her physical troubles continued and she realized something was wrong and that she might have been drugged.The lawsuit contends that at this point, the second player offered to show the woman his basketball memorabilia in his bedroom, where she was thrown down onto the bed and raped from behind.The lawsuit continues with the allegation that once the player, identified only as John Doe 2, finished raping the Plaintiff, the other two players, identified as John Doe 1 and John Doe 3, each came in and took turns raping the woman.The lawsuit says the woman does not remember anything after that, until she woke up on a couch a few hours later.The lawsuit then contends that the woman reported the rape to the Michigan State University Counseling Center, where, once they were informed the three alleged attackers were basketball players, the counselor's demeanor changed and that she told the woman that she needed another person in the room.The lawsuit contends that the staff person told her that her options were to file a police report, or deal with the aftermath of the rape on her own. However, the suit also contends that the staff made it clear that, if she reported the rape, she would face an uphill battle and unwanted media attention.The lawsuit also contends that staff members made comments to the effect of "we have had many other students in the same situation who have reported, and it has been very traumatic for them" and other comments 'implying' that it would not be in the plaintiff's best interest to report the incident to police, specifically "if you pursue this, you are going to be swimming with some really big fish."The lawsuit also contends that the counseling center did not advise the woman to seek STD or pregnancy testing, have a physical exam, or seek medical treatment. They also, allegedly, did not notify the woman of her option of reporting the rape to the Office of Institution Equity, or her Title IX rights, protections and accommodations.According to the lawsuit, this caused thw woman to become so frightened that she did not report the rape and she did not seek help from the Michigan State University Sexual Assault Program for 10 months.The woman was also not informed of her right to have a no-contact order put in place to keep the men out of her dorm, Brody Hall, where the woman says she would often see one or all three of the men in the dining hall.The suit contends that the woman was so traumatized after the rape that she sought psychiatric treatment at Sparrow Hospital in October 2015, stopped attending classes and was forced to withdraw in the fall semester of 2015.The suit seeks damages from the school and injunctive relief to have MSU put steps in place to prevent sexual assault. 5119

来源：资阳报