天津龙济专长天津龙济好不好怎么样,武清男科龙济官方在线咨询,天津市龙济医院专治男科吗,武清区龙济男科泌尿专科,天津市武清区龙济男科割包皮,武清区龙济泌尿专科怎样啊,天津武清区龙济男科路线

WICHITA, Kan. (AP) — An Ohio gamer upset about a .50 bet while playing Call of Duty: WWII online was sentenced Friday to 15 months in prison for recruiting a prankster to make a bogus emergency call that resulted in the fatal shooting of a Kansas man by police.Casey Viner, 19, of North College Hill, Ohio, also is restricted from gaming activity for two years while he is on supervised release after serving his prison term, U.S. District Judge Eric Melgren said in announcing the sentence.Viner repeatedly gulped and appeared crestfallen as the judge announced his sentencing decision. He glanced into the courtroom gallery where his parents were seated. His tearful mother got up and left the courtroom. His father, an Ohio law enforcement officer, put his head into his hands.Viner pleaded guilty in April to felony charges of conspiracy and obstruction of justice in the hope that he would not be sentenced to prison. Viner admitted trying to hide his involvement in the 2017 incident when he realized the antic had gotten someone killed.In a brief courtroom statement, Viner told the judge he is "awfully sorry" for what happened: "I never intended for anything to happen. I think of it every day."Prosecutors and defense lawyers in their plea agreement had recommended a sentence of two years on probation, with the added condition that Viner be confined for six months to his home unless attending school, work or church. They also jointly recommended the gaming restriction.But Melgren said a prison sentence was required to reflect the seriousness of the offense and give the public a sense the criminal justice system is working. It was foreseeable that something bad could happen by calling an armed police force to respond to what police believed was an escalating situation of violence, he said."We impose sentences not only for what people intend, but what happened," Melgren said.The death of 28-year-old Andrew Finch in Wichita, Kansas, drew national attention to "swatting," a form of retaliation in which someone reports a false emergency to get authorities, particularly a SWAT team, to descend on an address.Viner himself had been swatted just 20 days earlier to the Kansas incident, his defense attorney Jack Morrison, Jr. told the court. He said Viner is remorseful, noting and he lost about 20 pounds in recent months "on reflection of the gravity of what occurred as a result of what he believed to be a harmless prank."Authorities said Viner recruited Tyler R. Barriss to "swat" an opponent, then 19-year-old Shane Gaskill, in Wichita. But the address they used was old, leading police to Finch, who was not involved in the dispute or video game.Gaskill, who had previously given his old Wichita address to Viner, was charged as a co-conspirator after knowingly giving Barriss the same former address and taunting him to "try something."Barriss, a then 25-year-old Los Angeles man with an online reputation for "swatting," called police from Los Angeles on Dec. 28, 2017, to falsely report a shooting and kidnapping at that Wichita address. Finch was shot by police when he opened the door to see what was happening outside.Viner had just turned 18 about two weeks before the deadly swatting incident, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Debra Barnett argued probation would give him a better grasp of what he has done and would be a first step in helping him to grow up."At his age and his youthfulness, I am not sure he is going to get it if he is sitting in a cell block with people who are more hardened, more experienced than he is," she said.The federal indictment alleged that a forensic examination of Viner's iPhone recovered his deleted outgoing messages to unknown persons, including one in which Viner allegedly wrote: "I was involved in someone's death."Finch's family has sued the city of Wichita and the officers involved. Police have said the officer who shot Finch thought he was reaching for a gun because he moved a hand toward his waistband. The local district attorney declined to charge the officer.Gaskill has struck a deal for deferred prosecution that could allow the charges against him to be dropped.U.S. Attorney Stephen McAllister said outside the courthouse that a distinguishing factor in the government's handling of the prosecutions of the two gamers is that none of this would have happened if Viner had not reached out to Barriss and started the whole process.Barriss was sentenced in March to 20 years in prison after pleading guilty to 51 counts for making fake emergency calls and threats around the country, including the deadly hoax call in Kansas. Prosecutors believe it is the longest prison sentence ever imposed for "swatting."___This version of the story corrects the age of Gaskill at the time of the swatting to 19 in paragraph 11 and Barriss' age at the time to 25 in paragraph 13. 4857

While public health experts have acknowledged the risk for healthy athletes when becoming infected with the coronavirus has been rather low, lingering questions have remained on if the virus causes long-term cardiac damage.Doctors from the Sports and Exercise Cardiology Section of the American College of Cardiology released some of their preliminary findings on the effect the coronavirus has on athletes’ hearts.With college football fully resuming this week with the return of the Pac-12, and college basketball slated to get underway next month, sports are beginning to return to normal amid the pandemic. While some athletes are being frequently tested for the virus, testing alone has not stopped team-wide outbreaks from occurring.Despite there being some limited evidence that the virus causes cardiac injury to athletes, researchers wrote in JAMA that heart damage alone should not be the primary reason to postpone athletic competitions amid the pandemic.“While concerns about the implications of cardiac injury attributable to COVID-19 infection deserve further study, they should not constitute a primary justification for the cancellation or postponement of sports,” the researchers wrote.“Rather than canceling sports because of unsubstantiated concerns about cardiac safety based on limited data of unestablished clinical relevance, this decision should be driven by the need to limit viral spread,” researchers added. “With uncontrolled community transmission, we share concerns with public health officials about risks of increased disease transmission attributable to the resumption of organized sports. Accordingly, the decision to proceed with or delay organized sports should be based on community disease prevalence, coupled with the availability of resources that can be responsibly allocated to identify and prevent new infections among athletes.”The researchers said that initial findings have produced only a handful of cases of cardiac injury, but stressed that more research is needed.“Reports of presumptive myocarditis among several athletes with high profiles have magnified concerns about COVID-19 CV sequelae in athletes,” the researchers wrote. “Our combined experience suggests that most athletes with COVID-19 are asymptomatic to mildly ill, and to date, (return to play) risk stratification has yielded few cases of relevant cardiac pathology. However, we underscore that these observations may not reflect the true prevalence and attendant prognosis of COVID-19 CV involvement in athletes.”As far as what players should do following their 10-day isolation period, assuming they minimal coronavirus symptoms?“We do not advocate for (cardiovascular) risk stratification among athletes who remain completely asymptomatic with prior COVID-19 infection, following completion of US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guided self-isolation,” the researchers wrote. “Given the current lack of published data, consideration of comprehensive screening for this population could be reasonable if it is based on research and data collection.”The Big Ten, which was among several leagues that held out on playing at the start of the football season, requires athletes to undergo cardiovascular screening following a positive coronavirus test. Part of what concerned the Big Ten initially was reports that a number of its athletes who tested positive for the virus had shown myocarditis symptoms.According to the National Institutes of Health, myocarditis is an acute injury that “leads to myocyte damage, which in turn activates the innate and humeral immune system, leading to severe inflammation.”“All COVID-19 positive student-athletes will have to undergo comprehensive cardiac testing to include labs and biomarkers, ECG, Echocardiogram and a Cardiac MRI,” the Big Ten said in a statement. “Following cardiac evaluation, student-athletes must receive clearance from a cardiologist designated by the university for the primary purpose of cardiac clearance for COVID-19 positive student-athletes. The earliest a student-athlete can return to game competition is 21 days following a COVID-19 positive diagnosis. “In addition to the medical protocols approved, the 14 Big Ten institutions will establish a cardiac registry in an effort to examine the effects on COVID-19 positive student-athletes. The registry and associated data will attempt to answer many of the unknowns regarding the cardiac manifestations in COVID-19 positive elite athletes.”To read an abstract of the research, click here. 4546

While public health experts have acknowledged the risk for healthy athletes when becoming infected with the coronavirus has been rather low, lingering questions have remained on if the virus causes long-term cardiac damage.Doctors from the Sports and Exercise Cardiology Section of the American College of Cardiology released some of their preliminary findings on the effect the coronavirus has on athletes’ hearts.With college football fully resuming this week with the return of the Pac-12, and college basketball slated to get underway next month, sports are beginning to return to normal amid the pandemic. While some athletes are being frequently tested for the virus, testing alone has not stopped team-wide outbreaks from occurring.Despite there being some limited evidence that the virus causes cardiac injury to athletes, researchers wrote in JAMA that heart damage alone should not be the primary reason to postpone athletic competitions amid the pandemic.“While concerns about the implications of cardiac injury attributable to COVID-19 infection deserve further study, they should not constitute a primary justification for the cancellation or postponement of sports,” the researchers wrote.“Rather than canceling sports because of unsubstantiated concerns about cardiac safety based on limited data of unestablished clinical relevance, this decision should be driven by the need to limit viral spread,” researchers added. “With uncontrolled community transmission, we share concerns with public health officials about risks of increased disease transmission attributable to the resumption of organized sports. Accordingly, the decision to proceed with or delay organized sports should be based on community disease prevalence, coupled with the availability of resources that can be responsibly allocated to identify and prevent new infections among athletes.”The researchers said that initial findings have produced only a handful of cases of cardiac injury, but stressed that more research is needed.“Reports of presumptive myocarditis among several athletes with high profiles have magnified concerns about COVID-19 CV sequelae in athletes,” the researchers wrote. “Our combined experience suggests that most athletes with COVID-19 are asymptomatic to mildly ill, and to date, (return to play) risk stratification has yielded few cases of relevant cardiac pathology. However, we underscore that these observations may not reflect the true prevalence and attendant prognosis of COVID-19 CV involvement in athletes.”As far as what players should do following their 10-day isolation period, assuming they minimal coronavirus symptoms?“We do not advocate for (cardiovascular) risk stratification among athletes who remain completely asymptomatic with prior COVID-19 infection, following completion of US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guided self-isolation,” the researchers wrote. “Given the current lack of published data, consideration of comprehensive screening for this population could be reasonable if it is based on research and data collection.”The Big Ten, which was among several leagues that held out on playing at the start of the football season, requires athletes to undergo cardiovascular screening following a positive coronavirus test. Part of what concerned the Big Ten initially was reports that a number of its athletes who tested positive for the virus had shown myocarditis symptoms.According to the National Institutes of Health, myocarditis is an acute injury that “leads to myocyte damage, which in turn activates the innate and humeral immune system, leading to severe inflammation.”“All COVID-19 positive student-athletes will have to undergo comprehensive cardiac testing to include labs and biomarkers, ECG, Echocardiogram and a Cardiac MRI,” the Big Ten said in a statement. “Following cardiac evaluation, student-athletes must receive clearance from a cardiologist designated by the university for the primary purpose of cardiac clearance for COVID-19 positive student-athletes. The earliest a student-athlete can return to game competition is 21 days following a COVID-19 positive diagnosis. “In addition to the medical protocols approved, the 14 Big Ten institutions will establish a cardiac registry in an effort to examine the effects on COVID-19 positive student-athletes. The registry and associated data will attempt to answer many of the unknowns regarding the cardiac manifestations in COVID-19 positive elite athletes.”To read an abstract of the research, click here. 4546

WISCONSIN — A 19-year-old man has been charged with two felonies after police say he gave a gun to Kyle Rittenhouse the night two protesters were killed in Kenosha.Prosecutors say Dominick Black purchased the weapon from the Ladysmith Ace Home Center using money he received from 17-year-old Rittenhouse. Police say Black bought the weapon for Rittenhouse because he wasn't 18-years-old yet and couldn't do it himself.Black and Rittenhouse agreed that the rifle would be stored at Black's stepdad's house since Rittenhouse did not have an Illinois Firearm Owner Identification card, according to the criminal complaint. Black's stepdad lives in Kenosha.On Aug. 23, Jacob Blake was shot in the back several times by Kenosha police. The following days were then full of protests and unrest in Kenosha.According to the criminal complaint, on Aug. 25, Rittenhouse and Black volunteered to protect the Car Source located on Sheridan Road. The two met at Black's stepdad's house where Black gave Rittenhouse the gun he had purchased, a Smith & Wesson M&P 15 rifle.Around 11:49 p.m. that night, Rittenhouse used the gun to allegedly shoot and kill two individuals, Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber. Both killings were captured on video by witnesses and the videos were widely shared on social media, police say.Now, Rittenhouse is facing trial in Wisconsin and Black has been charged with two counts of intentionally giving a dangerous weapon to a person under 18, causing death.This crime is punishable for up to six years in prison, per count.This story originally reported by Julia Marshall on TMJ4.com. 1618

What to keep in mind with credit card bill payments (READ)Tips on handling your credit cards amid virus outbreak (READ)Help available for renters, homeowners struggling to pay for housing during pandemic (READ)3 ways credit cards can help you ride out a crisis (READ)SAN DIEGO (KGTV) -- Tens of thousands of people in California are being sued for not paying their credit card bills and other types of loan payments. The lawsuits are what's known as rule 3.740 collection cases."A lot of worrying after that, like oh my god, what am I going to do," said Chris Madden. "Stressed out now and just didn't need it."In February, Madden was served with a lawsuit from a debt collection company.During an interview with 10 News that month Madden said he needed to borrow money a few years ago to keep his car. He turned to a lender that could get him money quickly."I figured it was going to be a high-interest rate, like 22% or something," he said. "I started making the payments on it, and then I found out more about it."Madden admits he didn't do a great job getting all the details when he took the money, saying the interest rate wasn't clear. When he finally did look at the fine print, he saw the interest rate was 135%. Court documents show a ,000 loan turned into ,000 owed."They were threatening to take any assets that I have, garnish my wages," Madden said.Madden said he stopped paying. He's being sued by a debt buyer under what's known as a rule 3.740 collections case.According to the 2020 California Rules of Court, "Collections case" means an action for recovery of money owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than ,000, exclusive of interest and attorney fees, arising from a transaction in which property, services, or money was acquired on credit."Team 10 discovered a 157% increase in the number of rule 3.740 collections lawsuits filed in San Diego County court from 2015 to 2019. 1927