龙济男科刘大夫天津龙济男子男性不育,天津天津市武清区龙济医院门诊怎样,天津龙济医院治疗阳痿怎么样,去天津市龙济电话,天津天津武清龙济男子医院,武清省龙济医院预约,武清龙济男科医院就医环境怎么样

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- The California Supreme Court overturned the 2005 death sentence for Scott Peterson in the slaying of his pregnant wife.The court says prosecutors may try again for the same sentence if they wish in the high-profile case. It upheld Peterson's 2004 conviction of murdering his wife Laci Peterson.Laci Peterson was eight months pregnant with their unborn son, and investigators said that on Christmas Eve in 2002, Scott Peterson dumped the bodies from his fishing boat into San Francisco Bay.The court on Monday said the trial judge made several significant errors in jury selection that undermined Peterson's right to an impartial jury at the penalty phase.The court ruled potential jurors for the death penalty phase were improperly dismissed after saying they disagreed with the death penalty but would be willing to impose it."The trial judge made a mistake by kicking those people off the jury, so the only people that sat on the jury were in the death penalty camp," said criminal defense attorney Gretchen von Helms.Prosecutors will now decide whether to retry the sentencing phase.While the sentence was overturned, the court affirmed the murder convictions. "The sentencing was a positive step. The other decision (convictions affirmed) was about what we expected. Now we go to the habeas appeal," said Lee Peterson, Peterson's father.The court will examine the case again when it decides a separate habeas corpus challenge, based on evidence. not presented at the original trial. Peterson's father declined to talk about the arguments in the appeal, but says he's expecting a development within the next four months.Peterson's family issued this full statement in response to the court's decision:Our family is sincerely grateful that the California Supreme Court recognized the injustice of Scott’s death penalty. For a long and difficult 18 years, we have believed unwaveringly in Scott’s innocence, so today’s decision by the court is a big step toward justice for Laci, Conner and Scott.Now our family will do two things: First, we wait for Stanislaus County District Attorney Birgit Fladager to decide whether to pursue a new penalty phase trial. If the DA elects to do so, a new jury would be seated, and they would hear all the evidence. They would then decide only Scott’s sentence: life without the possibility of parole or the death penalty. While we hope for the opportunity to present the new evidence to a jury, it is not likely that this penalty phase trial will happen. The case against Scott has weakened to the point where no jury would ever sentence him to death again and the District Attorney is aware of these facts.Second, we wait for the court to address the new forensic and eyewitness evidence we have submitted that shows Laci was alive the morning of December 24th and demonstrates Scott’s innocence. When the court reviews this in the coming months, we are confident they will grant Scott a new guilt phase trial.Our family has been deeply moved by the outpouring of support not only from family and friends but also from the hundreds of people from all walks of life who have shared their faith in Scott’s innocence. For more information on the case, please visit our website at ScottPetersonAppeal.org. 3275

RINO Mitt Romney should read this. I’m sure, however, that he feels he got slaughtering by Obama “fair and square”. https://t.co/GGZKfSAp8z— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 20, 2020 201

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law Wednesday a bill making California the first state to ban workplace and school discrimination against black people for wearing hairstyles such as braids, twists and locks.The law by Democratic Sen. Holly Mitchell of Los Angeles, a black woman who wears her hair in locks, makes California the first state to explicitly say that those hairstyles are associated with race and therefore protected against discrimination in the workplace and in schools."We are changing the course of history, hopefully, across this country by acknowledging that what has been defined as professional hair styles and attire in the work place has historically been based on a Euro-centric model — based on straight hair," Mitchell said.Stephanie Hunter-Ray, who works at a makeup counter, says she typically wears her hair braided or in an afro, but one day she showed up to work with it straightened and styled in a bob. Her manager told Hunter-Ray her hair had never looked so normal."It bothered me," Hunter-Ray said in an interview at the hair salon she owns in Sacramento that specializes in natural hair styles. "What do you mean by 'normal?' Your normal is not my normal. My normal is my 'fro or my braids."Alikah Hatchett-Fall, who runs Sacred Crowns Salon in Sacramento, said she's had black men come into her salon asking to have their hair cut off because they can't find jobs.The law, she said, "means that psychologically and mentally people can be at ease and be able to get the jobs they want, keep the jobs they want, and get promoted at the jobs they want."California's new law, which takes effect Jan. 1, is significant because federal courts have historically held that hair is a characteristic that can be changed, meaning there's no basis for discrimination complaints based on hairstyle. The U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to hear the case of an Alabama woman who said she didn't get a job because she refused to change her hair.The issue burst into public view last December, when a black high school wrestler in New Jersey was told by a referee that he had to cut off his dreadlocks if he wanted to compete. California's Democratic governor said the video was a clear example of the discrimination black Americans face."His decision whether or not to lose an athletic competition or lose his identity came into, I think, stark terms for millions of Americans," Newsom said before signing the bill alongside Mitchell and half a dozen advocates. "That is played out in workplaces, it's played out in schools — not just athletic competitions and settings — every single day all across America in ways subtle and overt."Though California is the first state with such a law, New York City earlier this year issued legal guidance banning discrimination against someone based on their hairstyle. The beauty company Dove is part of a coalition pushing for more hairstyle protections, and Mitchell said she hopes other states follow California.Mitchell's bill adds language to the state's discrimination laws to say that "race" also includes "traits historically associated with race," including hair texture and protective hairstyles. It further defines protective hairstyles as braids, twists and locks.The term locks, or "locs," is the preferred term to dreadlocks, which has a derogatory connotation.At Hunter-Ray's studio, Exquisite U, on Wednesday, her stylists and customers reflected on the new law.Shereen Africa, who was having her hair re-braided by Elicia Drayton, said she used to work at a television station in Mississippi where a black anchor quit after facing resistance to wearing her hair in locks. Africa said she did not wear her hair in braids at the job, even though she wasn't on air, because the environment wasn't supportive of it."If I'm in a professional setting, I won't wear my hair in certain ways," she said.An anchor at a different Mississippi TV station made national news when she said she was fired after she stopped straightening her hair."You want to go to work and feel free," Drayton said. "You don't want to have to feel like you have to put on a wig or you have to have your hair straight to please someone else." 4222

SACRAMENTO (AP) — California on Thursday temporarily banned insurance companies from dropping customers in areas affected by more than a dozen recent blazes, invoking a new law for the first time as homeowners in the wildfire-plagued state struggle to find coverage while carriers seek to shed risk.The order from Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara will last for one year, and it only covers people who live inside or next to the perimeter of 16 different wildfires that burned across the state in October. The Department of Insurance estimates the moratorium will affect 800,000 policies covering millions of people in portions of Los Angeles and Riverside counties in Southern California and Sonoma County in the northern part of the state.The move comes as regulators are aggressively trying to assist homeowners in wildfire-prone areas who say they are being pushed out of the commercial insurance market as climate change makes fires larger and more frequent.RELATED: Cal Fire: Acres burned across the state is much lower in 2019 than 2018Seven of the 10 most destructive wildfires in California history have happened in the last five years — including 2018′s Camp Fire, which destroyed roughly 19,000 buildings and killed 85 people in and around the Northern California town of Paradise. That blaze alone generated more than billion in insurance claims, according to the Department of Insurance.Since 2015, state officials say insurance companies have declined to renew nearly 350,000 policies in areas at high risk for wildfires. That data does not include information on how many people were able to find coverage elsewhere or at what price.One of those homeowners is Sean Coffey, who said he and his wife have struggled to maintain fire insurance on their home in Oakland.“The pattern repeated itself almost every year since we bought our house. We would have (coverage) for 10 months. In the fall, we would get a notice we are being dropped,” he said.RELATED: Study: Alien grasses are making more frequent US wildfiresCoffey now buys fire insurance from the California Fair Access to Insurance Requirements Plan, an insurance pool mandated by state law that is required to sell policies to people who can’t buy them through no fault of their own. He must purchase a second policy to cover risks other than fire.FAIR Plan policies in wildfire-prone areas have grown an average of 8% each year since 2016, according to the Department of Insurance. Last month, Lara ordered the FAIR Plan to begin selling comprehensive policies next year that cover more than just fire damage. FAIR Plan Association President Anneliese Jivan called that order “a misguided approach,” saying it will make all of the plans more expensive.Lara has the authority to order the moratorium under a bill he authored while in the state Senate last year that was signed into law by former Gov. Jerry Brown. The law took effect in January, and this is the first time regulators have used it.In addition to ordering the moratorium, Lara called on insurance companies to voluntarily stop dropping customers solely because of wildfire risk.RELATED: Bigger, longer blackouts could lie ahead in California“I believe everyone in the state deserves this same breathing room,” Lara said.A spokeswoman for the American Property Casualty Insurance Association did not immediately respond to a request for comment.While state officials rush to assist homeowners, a new report from California Auditor Elaine Howle said the state did not do enough to protect non-English speaking, elderly and other vulnerable residents during three of the state’s most devastating fires in recent years.The audit covered Butte County, site of 2018′s Camp fire, plus the 2017 Thomas Fire that burned more than 281,000 acres in Ventura County and 2017 fires in Sonoma County that killed 24 people. The audit found none of the three counties had assessed its residents to determine who might need extra help and whether resources were available to help such people, such as transportation, during a natural disaster.The audit also scolds the state oversight agency, the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, for failing to assist counties in developing such plans and reviewing any plans in place.Howle says it was impossible to determine whether lives could have been saved “if the counties had planned differently or more fully implemented the best practices”her office recommends in the report.” But she noted that “inadequate plans and insufficient planning are proven contributors to failure.” 4561

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