济南痛风怎样产生济南中医可以治好痛风吗,山东痛风可吃百合吗,济南痛风有什么特征,山东全国有名的痛风医院有哪些,山东尿酸高425怎么办,北京脚背疼是痛风,山东看痛风关节炎科哪家医院好

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California's attorney general is demanding that a university journalism program return a state list that includes law enforcement officers convicted of crimes in the past decade, saying the information wasn't meant to be public and shouldn't have been given out by another agency.Attorney General Xavier Becerra's office sent reporters from the Investigative Reporting Program at the University of California, Berkeley a notice that confidential information had been inadvertently released from a confidential database, the program reported Tuesday.The attorney general's office said possessing the list was a misdemeanor and asked the reporters to destroy it. They received it last month from California's police training agency through a public records request.The reporters refused, but so far have released only limited details about the list. They say the list of nearly 12,000 names includes current and former officers and those who applied to be officers. It's not clear how many are active officers and how many had never been officers.The list outlines crimes including shoplifting, child molestation, embezzlement and murder. It's not clear how many of the convicted officers remain on the job.In a statement to The Associated Press late Tuesday, Becerra's office reiterated its position that the information came from a confidential database to which the reporters should not have had access."State law protects the records of all Californians in this database by prohibiting the possession and use of this information by anyone not identified by statute," his office said.The report comes as he is also refusing to release old records of serious misconduct by his own justice department agents under a new law that requires the release. Becerra is citing conflicting court decisions on whether records should be made public for incidents that happened before the disclosure law took effect Jan. 1.In a letter to reporter Robert Lewis with the reporting program's production arm, Investigative Studios, Deputy Attorney General Michelle Mitchell said the criminal history information was taken from a confidential law enforcement database where "access to information is restricted by law.""You are hereby on notice that the unauthorized receipt or possession...is a misdemeanor," she wrote, threatening unspecified legal action.First Amendment Coalition executive director David Snyder told the reporting program that, "It's disheartening and ominous that the highest law enforcement officer in the state is threatening legal action over something the First Amendment makes clear can't give rise to criminal action against a reporter."Without providing many details, the reporting program said the list includes current, former or prospective officers who dealt drugs, stole from their departments, sexually assaulted suspects, took bribes, filed false reports and committed perjury. A large number drove drunk, and sometimes killed people while doing so.The reporting program said the list came after a law last year allowed the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to keep records of when current or former officers are convicted of felonies or other crimes that would disqualify them from law enforcement. Previously, the commission would have to wait until the officer had exhausted all appeals before deeming them unqualified, but now the initial conviction is enough.That led the attorney general's office to provide the commission with the list of current and former officers with convictions. The commission provided the reporting program with 10 years' worth of convictions.Nic Marais, an attorney representing Investigative Studios, said in a letter to Becerra's office that the records are publicly releasable because they are summaries. He added that state law exempts reporters from prosecution for receiving records.Attorney Michael Rains, who represents police officers, told the reporting program that he understands there is public interest in police officers convicted of crimes, but said the same disclosure should apply to everyone. He noted there is no broad public disclosure of crimes committed by lawyers, doctors or teachers. 4210

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California utilities again are facing severe financial pressures from the possibility that their equipment sparked catastrophic wildfires, including two that are now burning at either end of the state.The pressure comes even though Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation in September giving utilities some relief beginning next year.The law made it easier for utilities to pass along costs from fire-related damages to consumers and also avoid possible bankruptcy from a series of major fires that occurred during the 2017 fire season that produced more than billion in losses.But there was a gap in the law: No damages specific to 2018 were included, so utilities face a higher bar to bill customers to cover those costs. And this year already supplanted 2017 as the most destructive in California's recorded history.Authorities have not determined a cause for either of two major blazes burning now, but Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison have reported irregularities with their equipment near the time and place where both ignited.A woman who owns land near the site where a deadly wildfire started in Northern California said Monday that Pacific Gas & Electric Co. sought access to her property just before the blaze started because the utility's power lines were causing sparks.PG&E shares have lost more than a third of their value since the Camp Fire broke out northeast of San Francisco, destroying thousands of homes and killing dozens of people as it leveled the town of Paradise.Moody's Investors Service said Monday that the "shortcomings" in the legislation reflect negatively on PG&E's credit rating, which is barely investment grade."Moody's negative outlook incorporates the view that additional financial stress for PG&E is likely," Moody's spokesman Joe Mielenhausen said in an email. "Going forward, we will look for signs of additional legislative and regulatory support for the utility as it works through various legal processes."Last week PG&E told state regulators that it detected a problem on an electrical transmission line near the site of the blaze minutes before the fire broke out. The utility later said it observed damage to a transmission tower on the line, and a PG&E spokeswoman said the company will cooperate with any investigations.Betsy Ann Cowley, a property owner near the site said PG&E sought access to the area before the fire started, telling her power lines were sparking.Southern California Edison told regulators there was an outage on an electrical circuit near the site where the Woolsey Fire started in Ventura County. It quickly spread into Malibu and destroyed hundreds of homes.SoCal Edison said the report was submitted out of an abundance of caution and there was no indication from fire officials that its equipment may have been involved. The report said the fire was reported around 2:24 p.m. Thursday, two minutes after the outage.Shares of parent company Edison International have tumbled more than 20 percent since the fire started.California is one of just two states that hold electric companies entirely liable for damage caused by their equipment, even if they followed all safety precautions. The new law makes it easier for them to pass some of those costs along to consumers.Utilities lobbied aggressively to eliminate that strict liability standard but lawmakers dropped the idea amid pressure from insurers, trial lawyers and fire victims.Instead, legislators passed a law making it easier for utilities to manage the costs without going bankrupt. They created two mechanisms for investor-owned utilities to shift the costs of wildfire lawsuits onto their customers— one process that begins in 2019, and another for the 2017 fires.For reasons that remain unclear, the law left the rules unchanged for 2018."The priority was on addressing 2017 victims and putting in place some fire-safety measures," said Paul Payne, a spokesman for Sen. Bill Dodd, a Napa Democrat and the bill's author. "The focus was on making 2017 victims whole."It's too soon to say whether the Legislature will take up another fight over the 2018 fires, Payne said.SoCal Edison officials say the Legislature needs to do more to shield utilities from wildfire-related liability."SCE believes the state can do more, including enacting fire-smart building codes, particularly in high fire risk areas, and ensuring the proper allocation of risk for the often-tragic consequences of wildfires," spokeswoman Justina Garcia wrote in an email.A PG&E spokesman, Paul Doherty, did not respond to questions about the legislation, saying "our entire company is focused on supporting first responders."Sen. Jerry Hill, a Redwood City Democrat and longtime critic of PG&E, called the report of troubles on PG&E's lines in the area extremely worrisome."At some point we have to say enough is enough and we have to ask: Should this company be allowed to do business in California?" Hill said. "These fires take a spark, and at least in the last few years fires have been caused by negligent behavior by PG&E. We need to see how we can hold them responsible, or look at alternative way of doing business."Hill said he was exploring legislative options to keep a closer check on PG&E, including the possibility of breaking up the utility."They are a monopoly and they act as a monopoly," Hill said. "That is a problem when the motive is profit, and that just may not be the right motive for providing utility services." 5560

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — The enthusiasm both parties say exists in the electorate hasn't yet translated into early voting in California, where the percentage of people who have voted so far is similar to this time four years ago.Voters who are Republican, white and older are sending in their ballots early at a higher rate, which is typical in California elections, said Paul Mitchell of Political Data Inc., a firm that collects voter data from the counties.About 570,000 Californians had cast ballots as of early Monday. That's about 100,000 more than voted at this point in the 2014 election. About 12.5 million people received mail-in ballots, compared to 9.2 million four years ago.RELATED: What you need to know about voting this NovemberThe early numbers are just a fraction of the total voters expected to cast ballots by mail. California voters can send in their ballots through Election Day, on Nov. 6, and ballots are counted as long as they are received by the Friday after the election.In 2014 roughly 4.5 million people cast mail ballots."Right now it's hard to tell exactly how much we're measuring enthusiasm and how much we're measuring changes in the mechanics of the elections," Mitchell said.Monday is the deadline to register to vote, although people can register conditionally through Election Day. Their ballots will be treated like provisional ballots that are counted after the voter information is verified.Statewide, Republicans count for just a quarter of registered voters. But they make up 34 percent of early voters.RELATED: See your sample ballot for the November 2018 electionEighty percent of already returned mail ballots are from voters older than 50, even though they make up only about half of the electorate.Democrats need strong turnout to win U.S. House seats in Orange County and the Central Valley that have long been held by Republicans. They're banking on increased enthusiasm among voters angry at President Donald Trump or concerned about issues such as health care and immigration to drive turnout."For Democrats to win these competitive congressional races they need atypical," Mitchell said.Drew Godinich, a spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said Latinos and young voters are "outpacing expectations" in key districts and that it's too early to jump to conclusions about turnout."In these tight races, every vote counts — and Democrats have been organizing since last year to turn out our voters in these crucial midterms," he said in a statement.More than 19 million people registered to vote as of early September, a record in a California gubernatorial election.Mitchell predicts a 56 percent voter turnout. That would be higher than the 2014 election but lower than 2010. 2774

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday announced that he is commuting the sentences of 21 inmates, most serving life terms and several who otherwise had no chance of ever leaving prison. The decisions give them a chance at release if a parole board agrees. They are:— Allen Burnett (Orange County) was 18 in 1992 when he and two others carjacked a college student and another man fatally shot the victim. Burnett has served 27 years of a life-without-parole term for first-degree murder. Newsom cited the fact that Burnett, now 45, was a youthful offender who has participated in a prison honor program since 2010 and whose commutation was supported by an associate warden. He commuted Burnett's sentence to 27 years to life.— Alex Barajas (Santa Clara County) was 21 in 2005 when he shot a rival gang member and the man's friend, injuring them both. He is now 35 and has served nearly 14 years of an 80-years-to-life term for two counts of attempted murder, which included two sentencing enhancements of 25 years to life for using a firearm. Barajas has participated in a program that teaches inmates job and life skills. Newsom's commutation makes Barajas eligible for a parole suitability hearing after another year in prison. Newsom cited his young age at the time and what he termed "his disproportionately long sentencing enhancements."— Jaime Cabrales (Los Angeles County) was 27 in 2007 when he was sentenced to 32 years to life for attempted murder for a gang-related shooting. A passenger in the car Cabrales was driving shot at four men, injuring one. The commutation makes Cabrales, now 39, eligible for a parole suitability hearing. Newsom cited Cabrales's self-improvement efforts in prison.— Cristina Chavez (Los Angeles County) was 21 in 2008 when she drove a man to a house to burglarize a car. Chavez fired a BB gun at the car owner's brother when he confronted them, but the pellet hit another vehicle. Later that year, a woman identified as Chavez shot and injured a man in his car at a fast-food restaurant drive-through. She is serving a sentence of 34 years and 8 months to life. It includes an sentencing enhancement of 25 years to life for using a firearm in the restaurant shooting. Chavez, now 33, has served 11 years in prison. The commutation will make her eligible for a parole suitability hearing. Newsom cited her young age at the time and what he called "her disproportionately long sentence."— Andrew Crater (Sacramento County) was 20 in 1995 when he took part in a string of robberies that ended with his accomplice killing a victim. Crater, now 43, has served more than 24 years of a life-without-parole sentence. His clemency appeal was backed by two wardens. It reduces his sentence to 25 years to life. Newsom cited his youth at the time of the crime and his self-improvement efforts in prison.— Keefe Dashiell (Los Angeles County) was 19 in 2007 when he was involved in a gang-related shooting that injured a woman. Dashiell, now 31, has served nearly 11 years of a 30-year term for attempted murder, which included 20 years of sentencing enhancements. The commutation makes Dashiell eligible for a parole suitability hearing. Newsom cited support from prison staff and what he called Dashiell's "disproportionately long sentencing enhancements."— Leonia Esteem (Riverside County) was 47 when she tried to kill her boyfriend during an argument. She is now 61 and has served nearly 14 years of a 32-years-to-life term for attempted murder, including a 25-years-to-life enhancement for use of a firearm. The commutation makes Esteem eligible for a parole suitability hearing. Newsom cited her self-improvement efforts and what Newsom called her "disproportionately long sentencing enhancements."— Jacoby Felix (Sacramento County) was 18 in 1993 when he and an accomplice fatally shot a man while trying to steal his car. He is now 43 and has served nearly 26 years of a life-without-parole sentence. Newsom commuted his sentence to 26 years to life. He cited Felix's youth at the time of the crime and his self-improvement efforts in prison.—Dimitri Gales (Los Angeles County) was 19 when his accomplice shot a rival gang member in the arm, injuring him. Gales, 26, has served seven years of an 18 years-to-life term for attempted voluntary manslaughter in a gang-related shooting. The commutation makes him eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 10th year of incarceration. Newsom cited his "exceptional conduct" in prison and his youth at the time of the shooting.— Theodore Gray (Shasta County) was 22 when he was sentenced to 40 years to life for robbery and murder. He has now served nearly 20 years in prison, where he earned a bachelor's degree and is a certified alcohol- and drug-treatment counselor. Newsom said Gray has been formally commended by staff 79 times for his positive attitude and influence on other inmates. The commutation will make him eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 25th year of incarceration.— Crystal Jones (Sacramento County) was 20 in 1999 when he and an accomplice killed a man during a drug-related murder. He has served nearly 20 years of a life-without-parole sentence and is now 41. Newsom said Jones is currently a hospice worker and has been commended by prison staff for his dedication to his work. He commuted Jones' sentence to 25 years to life.— Marcus McJimpson (Fresno County) was 21 in 1988 when he shot and killed two men during an altercation. He has served 31 years on two life-without-parole sentences and is now 52. Newsom said he was a founding member of the Paws for Life dog training program. He commuted the sentence to 35 years to life.— Adonis Muldrow (Santa Clara County) was 15 when he and a 26-year-old accomplice robbed four businesses, and his accomplice fatally shot a man during a carjacking. Both men shot at a pursuing police officer, who was not seriously injured. The commutation makes Muldrow eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 10th year of incarceration, about 2022. Newsom cited the fact that he was a minor at the time of his crime.— Maurice Nails (Alameda County) was 21 in 2007 when he fatally shot a man after a dispute outside of a nightclub. Nails, now 33, has served 11 years of a 40-years-to-life sentence, including a 25-years-to-life sentencing enhancement for using a firearm. The commutation makes him eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 15th year of incarceration, about 2022. Newsom cited his young age at the time of the killing and what the governor called his "disproportionately long sentencing enhancements."— Alladin Pangilinan (Alameda County) was 19 when he was sentenced to 69 years and 8 months to life for first-degree murder. Pangilinan was sentenced as a repeat offender for his role in three gang-related crimes that ended with an accomplice killing a suspected rival gang member. Pangilinan, 42, has served more than 23 years in prison. The commutation makes him eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 25th year of incarceration. Newsom cited his age at the time of the crimes and what he termed "disproportionately long sentencing enhancements."— Doris Roldan (Los Angeles County) was 42 when she worked with two accomplices to kill her husband in 1981. She is now 80 and has served 38 years of a sentence of life without chance of parole. Her warden recommended her commutation, which reduces her sentence to 38 years to life. Newsom cited her "exceptional conduct in prison."— Bryant Salas (Los Angeles County) was 18 in 2007 when he participated in a gang-related fight during which an accomplice stabbed two men, killing one. Salas, 30, has served 12 years of a 32-years-to-life term for second-degree murder. Newsom cited his participation in an honors program and the Paws for Life service dog training program. The commutation will make Salas eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 15th year of incarceration, about 2021.— Lazaro Tanori (Los Angeles County) was 19 in 2006 when he tried to rob a pawn shop at gunpoint, though no one was injured. He was sentenced to 21 years and 4 months in prison for attempted robbery, including a 20-year enhancement for using a gun. He is now 32 and has served 13 years. The commutation makes him eligible for a parole suitability hearing. Newsom cited his youth and what he called "his disproportionately long sentencing enhancement."— Marsi Torres (Los Angeles County) was 18 when she shot a 16-year-old rival gang member, who survived. She has served more than 12 years of a 50-years-to-life term for attempted murder. The sentence included a 25-years-to-life enhancement for using a firearm and a 10-year gang enhancement. Newsom said Torres, 30, has been commended by staff for her positive attitude and commitment to assisting other inmates. The commutation makes her eligible for a parole suitability hearing.— Antonio Toy (Los Angeles County) was 23 when he shot a man in the leg after an altercation. He is now 33 and has served nearly 10 years of a 39-years-to-life sentence for attempted murder, which included a sentencing enhancement of 25 years to life for using a firearm. The commutation makes him eligible for a parole suitability hearing in his 15th year of incarceration. Newsom cited Toy's youth at the time of the crime what the governor termed his "disproportionately long sentencing enhancement."— Luis Velez (Sacramento County) was 26 when he killed an armed transport guard during a robbery. He has served more than 28 years of a life-without-parole sentence. Newsom commuted the sentence for Velez, now 55, to 28 years to life. He cited Velez's "exceptional conduct and self-development efforts in prison." 9722

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Athletes at California colleges could hire agents and sign endorsement deals under a bill the state Legislature sent to the governor on Wednesday, setting up a potential confrontation with the NCAA that could jeopardize the athletic futures of powerhouse programs like USC, UCLA and Stanford.Gov. Gavin Newsom has not said whether he will sign it. But the NCAA Board Of Governors is already urging him not to, sending him a letter Wednesday saying the bill "would erase the critical distinction between college and professional athletics" and would have drastic consequences for California's colleges and universities."Because it gives those schools an unfair recruiting advantage, (it) would result in them eventually being unable to compete in NCAA competitions," the letter said. "These outcomes are untenable and would negatively impact more than 24,000 California student-athletes across three divisions."Newsom has 30 days to either sign the bill, veto it or let it become law without his signature.The bill would allow student-athletes to hire agents and be paid for the use of their names, images or likenesses. It would stop California universities and the NCAA from banning athletes that take the money. If it becomes law, it would take effect Jan. 1, 2023."I'm sick of being leveraged by the NCAA on the backs of athletes who have the right to their own likeness and image, this is about fairness," Assemblywoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove, a Los Angeles Democrat, said Monday.The Senate voted 39-0 to pass the bill, which has the endorsement of NBA superstar LeBron James, who skipped college and went directly to the NBA before the league changed its rules to require players to be at least one year removed from high school before entering the draft. But the bill could impact James' 14-year-old son, who is a closely watched basketball prospect in Los Angeles.The NCAA is the governing body for college sports. But membership is voluntary. Athletes can get valuable scholarships, but the NCAA has long banned paying athletes to preserve the academic missions of colleges and universities. But college sports have since morphed into a multibillion-dollar industry, igniting a debate over the fairness of not paying the industry's most visible labor force.Earlier this year, NCAA President Mark Emmert told lawmakers that passing the bill would be premature, noting the NCAA has a committee — led by Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith and Big East Commissioner Val Ackerman — that is exploring the issue. Their report is due in October.The NCAA committee has already said it won't endorse a plan to pay athletes as if they were employees, but they could ease limits on endorsement deals for athletes. The NCAA already lets athletes accept money in some instances. Tennis players can accept up to ,000 in prize money and Olympians can accept winnings from their competitions.The bill still puts some restrictions on athletes, such as forbidding them from signing endorsement deals that conflict with their school's existing contracts.Republican Assemblyman Jim Patterson of Fresno was the only lawmaker to speak against the bill, though he did not cast a vote. He said allowing athletes to make money could make universities in rural areas less competitive because there could be fewer sponsorship opportunities in the area.But other lawmakers argued banning college athletes from being paid was a violation of their freedoms."Playing college sports should not have to come at the cost of personal liberty, dignity, self-expression or any other value this legislature is charged with protecting," said Republican Assemblyman Kevin Kiley of Rocklin. "Let's send a loud and clear message to the NCAA."But in and around California, schools and conferences believe this legislation might not be the best solution.The Pac-12, which includes Southern California, UCLA, Stanford and Cal, issued a statement Wednesday reiterating its previous stance — asking the California Legislature to delay the debate until the NCAA announces formal proposals."We all want to protect and support our student-athletes, and the Pac-12 has played a leadership role in national reforms for student-athletes over the past years," the statement said. "The question is what's the best way to continue to support our student-athletes. We think having more information and informed views will be helpful."J.D. Wicker, the athletic director at San Diego State, a Mountain West Conference member, agreed, saying "California weighing in on this complicates that.""I think the frustration for me is that they probably don't truly understand the NCAA and how we work as a governing body," Wicker said. "Again, it's schools across 50 states and it's all of us working together, whereas the state of California will only harm California schools." 4858