11-year-old stabs dad to death for beating mom'

CEBU CITY, Philippines–An 11-year-old girl stabbed her father dead Sunday night after she saw him hitting her mother on the head and cutting her leg with a hacksaw inside their house in Argao town, 58 km south of this city, the authorities said.

The 38-year-old father was found dead on a vacant grassy lot a few minutes after he ran away from his daughter who stabbed him in the chest at about 11 p.m. inside their house in Barangay Canbanua, Argao.

The police took custody of the girl who was later turned over to the Department of Social Welfare and Development, said Insp. Alan Batobalunos, Argao police chief.

Batobalunos said the girl didn’t know that she killed her father. “Napatay nako si Papa ma? Mapriso ko (I killed papa, ma? Would I go to jail?” Batobalunos quoted the girl as asking her mother.

But he added the girl didn’t cry but instead told the police that they would not know what would happen to her and her two sisters if their mother was killed.

Their neighbor Miguel Tapales said they heard the couple arguing past 11 p.m. on Sunday. He said he just ignored it because they thought it was just one of the couple’s usual fights.

After several minutes, Tapales said the 11-year–old girl went to their house and asked for help.

“She asked for help because she feared that her father might come back and kill them. She said she stabbed her father after she saw that her father was cutting her mother’s leg with a hacksaw,” said Tapales in Cebuano.

Her mother was later brought to Isidro Kintanar Memorial Hospital in Argao and was released on Monday morning.

Perlita Buenaflor, another neighbor said they would always hear the couple quarreling. On Friday, the husband destroyed the wall of their house in the middle of the fight.

Buenaflor said the arguments were triggered by jealousy because the victim was allegedly a womanizer.

Batobalunos and the couple’s neighbors said the victim was fired from his job as a driver of a Department of Environment and Natural Resources personnel after he had an affair with a married officemate.

He then worked at the Office of the Mayor in Argao but lost his job again when he had a fling with another officemate.

Aside from the 11-year-old girl, the couple has two other daughters–a 13-year-old Grade 6 pupil and a two-month old infant.

Man charged with trying to bomb downtown Chicago bar

(Reuters) - An 18-year-old man who tried to set off what he thought was a car bomb outside a downtown Chicago bar on Friday night has been arrested and charged in a federal undercover sting, authorities said Saturday.

Adel Daoud, a U.S. citizen who lives in the Chicago suburb of Hillside, planned for months for the attack and prayed with a man who turned out to be an undercover agent before attempting to set off a bomb in a Jeep outside a bar, authorities said.

Daoud, who considered up to 29 possible targets, was charged with one count of attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction and one count of attempt to damage and destroy a building by means of an explosive.

The inert explosives posed no threat to the public and were supplied by undercover law enforcement, acting U.S. Attorney Gary Shapiro said in a statement. Daoud was closely monitored and offered several opportunities to change his mind.

According to an FBI affidavit, Daoud used email accounts starting in about October 2011 to gather and send materials "relating to violent jihad and the killing of Americans."

Daoud emailed a lengthy powerpoint presentation to several people defending the tactics of al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden and emailed himself several articles on Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S.-born Muslim cleric who the U.S. said was a leader of al Qaeda's Yemen affiliate, the affidavit said.

Awlaki was killed in a drone strike in September 2011.

Daoud also was registered in an Internet forum where members "discuss violent jihad and distribute jihadist propaganda and related instructional materials," the affidavit said.

Two undercover FBI employees began corresponding with Daoud in May, exchanging several electronic messages with him in which he expressed an interest in "engaging in violent jihad, either in the United States or overseas," the affidavit said.

From late May to mid-June, Daoud sought guidance on whether to carry out an attack in the United States, then sought online resources on how to carry out an attack, the affidavit said.

CONSIDERED ATTACKING TOURIST ATTRACTIONS

An undercover FBI agent then was introduced to Daoud by one of the undercover employees as a cousin and operational terrorist living in New York, the affidavit said.

Daoud listed 29 possible targets on four handwritten pages from a notebook he showed the undercover agent at a meeting on August 6, including military recruiting centers, bars, malls and other Chicago-area tourist attractions, the affidavit said.

"Early in their conversation, Daoud emphasized that any attack they committed needed to be recognized as a 'terrorist attack,'" the affidavit states about the early August meeting.

He told the undercover agent at a meeting on August 23 that he had selected the bar targeted on Friday, the affidavit said. They met again in early September and then on Thursday viewed the green Jeep Cherokee with the inert explosive device at a storage unit in Bellwood, Illinois.

On Friday, Daoud met with the undercover agent in a Chicago suburb, and he led a prayer that the attack would succeed in killing many people as they drove the agent's vehicle to downtown Chicago, the affidavit said.

In downtown Chicago, Daoud picked up the Jeep that contained the purported explosives from a parking lot and drove it to the targeted bar, the affidavit said. They did not identify the bar.

Daoud walked to an alley about a block from the bar and tried to set off the device in the agent's presence before FBI agents arrested him, the affidavit said.

The case is not the first in which undercover agents have been used to gather evidence of suspected plots.

Four self-described anarchists have pleaded guilty to plotting to blow up a four-lane highway bridge near Cleveland in April and a fifth suspect is undergoing competency testing.

An undercover FBI agent sold the men inoperable detonators and plastic explosives, which they placed at the base of the bridge. Authorities said the five men had no ties to foreign militant groups.

A Moroccan man pleaded guilty in June to attempting a suicide bombing of the U.S. Capitol building in Washington in February. An undercover agent drove the suspect on the day of that planned attack.

Authorities also used undercover officers to gather evidence at the Chicago summit of the NATO military alliance in May. Three men described as anarchists were arrested then and accused of attempting to make Molotov cocktails to hurl at police.

Daoud had an initial appearance on Saturday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys in federal court in Chicago. He is being held pending a detention and preliminary hearing that is scheduled for 3 p.m. Monday.

Daoud faces up to life in prison if convicted of attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction. The second charge calls for a sentence of from five to 20 years.

Drew Peterson fires lawyer who opposed Savio divorce lawyer as witness

Drew Peterson has fired the attorney who loudly warned against calling Kathleen Savio’s divorce lawyer as a defense witness – a move which Peterson’s lead counsel insisted upon and many considered a devastating miscalculation.

Peterson notified attorney Steve Greenberg of his decision Tuesday, just days after jurors said divorce lawyer Harry Smith’s testimony tipped the scales in the prosecution's favor and led to the retired Bolingbrook police sergeant’s conviction.

Smith told jurors that Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy, asked him if she could get more money in a divorce if she threatened to tell police about her husband’s role in Savio’s death.

Lead attorney Joel Brodsky decided to call Smith against the advice of the rest of the defense team and after the judge warned him of the possible consequences. Greenberg was overheard pleading with him not to do it in a courthouse hallway.

The debate ended when Peterson sided with Brodsky.

“I think Mr. Peterson was represented by five wonderful lawyers out of six,” Greenberg said Tuesday. “His loyalty to the sixth is disconcerting.”

Greenberg – who had argued several motions during the prosecution’s case to limit what Smith could tell jurors under state questioning – warned Brodsky that he could be opening Pandora’s Box during their hallway shouting match.

“I've filed 74 (expletive) motions to keep him out and now you're going to undo all of it,” Greenberg told Brodsky in a loud, exasperated voice.

Tensions, however, had been building between Brodsky and Greenberg long before Smith's appearance. They clashed earlier this year when Greenberg publicly suggested that Peterson’s and Brodsky’s sophomoric television and radio appearances in the weeks after Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy, disappeared were far more damaging to his client’s case than a made-for-TV movie about Peterson.

Though Greenberg had a good rapport with Will County Judge Edward Burmila and had been winning most of the defense team’s successful motions, Brodsky banned him from making objections and often hushed him in court.

Still, Greenberg and Brodsky presented a united front before the TV cameras during their frequent news conferences. Wearing sunglasses and wide grins, they often poked fun at prosecutors and witnesses.

The duo, along with defense attorney Joe Lopez, were sharply criticized for a press conference during jury selection in which they mocked Stacy Peterson’s disappearance. They later apologized.

Brodsky had never tried a homicide case before Peterson hired him in 2007.

Brodsky has repeatedly told the Tribune that Greenberg was not a team player.

“Even though Mr. Greenberg did win many of the motions, these were on small issues,” Brodsky said Tuesday. “Greenberg lost the big ones, such as banning the hearsay previously found to be (inadmissible), and keeping the ‘hit man’ testimony out.”

Alabama School System Teaches Kids to Fight Gunman by Throwing Scissors, Pencils, Pens

By Michael Allen, Mon, September 03, 2012

The Tuscaloosa City School System, in Alabama, is offering some controversial advice to students in case of a school shooting, reports the Daily Mail.

The ALICE [Alert-Lockdown-Inform-Counter-Evacuate] program instructs kids how to gang-tackle a gunman, reports TuscaloosaNews.com.

The four-hour training sessions also advises children to fight an armed gunman with scissors, text books, pencils and pens. 

The courses teach more realistic advice such as instructing kids to look for escape routes or places to hide.

Lt. A.B. Green, school resource officer supervisor for Tuscaloose Police Department, told TuscaloosaNews.com: "What we've been teaching nationwide is everybody stopping, locking the doors and hiding where you are. Those concepts work, but they're not an absolute."

"We can train teachers and students to a certain degree. At a certain level, though, we have to train the students to use their last resource, which is to defend themselves."

'We know that these things can happen anywhere. We always hope that this won't happen in our schools, but that doesn't mean we should fail to prepare for it. If you look at the responses that the individuals had on those cases where there was no response or people decided to stop and hide, the casualties were greater in those cases."

Raquel Payne-Giles, principal at Paul W. Bryant High School, told TuscaloosaNews.com: "They did a skit where a person walked in with a toy gun and what actually happens if everyone throws things at him,. The person began to protect themselves, and it threw him off for a few minutes. That's time to run."

"If they get too close, they teach us how to restrain them. One smaller woman can't restrain a large man, but what about three or four of them? That's why the training is not about doing it by yourself. It's about attacking en masse." 

Marine detained for Facebook posts moved hundreds of miles away from family

The US Marine that was hauled off to a psychiatric ward last week over his Facebook posts has been transferred to a facility hundreds of miles away from his friends and family, all for what his attorneys call exercising his First Amendment right.

The Richmond, VA home of Brandon J. Raub, 26, was stormed by agents with the FBI, Secret Service and local law enforcement officers last Thursday after authorities became concerned with postings made by the retired Marine on his personal Facebook page that critiqued the federal government and challenged their explanations of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Raub was initially admitted to the John Randolph Medical Center in nearby Hopewell without being charged, but this week it is being reported that the man has been moved to Veterans Hospital in Salem, roughly 300 miles away.

The Rutherford Institute, Raub’s attorneys, filed an emergency motion to reject the transfer to the facility more than three hours away from his family, friends and legal team, but their request was denied. Under Virginia law, police are allowed to subject citizens to emergency, temporary psychiatric commitments if a mental health professional advises as such.

One week after Raub was first detained, little about his mental health has been revealed. His attorneys say the real focus, though, should be into why a federal investigation targeted their client over mere Facebook posts.

“This is not how justice in America is supposed to work — with Americans being arrested for doing nothing more than exercising their First Amendment rights, forced to undergo psychological evaluations, detained against their will and isolated from their family, friends and attorneys. This is a scary new chapter in our history,” Rutherford Institute President John W. Whitehead says in a statement released on Tuesday this week. “Brandon Raub is no different from the majority of Americans who use their private Facebook pages to post a variety of content, ranging from song lyrics and political hyperbole to trash talking their neighbors, friends and government leaders.”

In the days before Raub was detained, the marine used his Facebook profile as an outlet for messages such as,“The Revolution will come for me. Men will be at my door soon to pick me up to lead it” and “Sharpen up my axe; I'm here to sever heads.” In other posts published back to back on August 14, Raub links to a photo of the US Defense Department’s headquarters at the Pentagon, “right after our leaders shot a missle [sic] into it,” as he claims, and then a video he says shows “firefighters talking about the explosive charges placed within the twin towers.”

Raub's mother, Cathleen Thomas, tells the Associated Press that she believes the government overstepped its bound and, "The bottom line is his freedom of speech has been violated."

Paper or plastic? Evanston mulls ban on both

April 26, 2011|By Dan Hinkel, Jonathan Bullington and Robert McCoppin, Tribune reporters

When it comes to paper or plastic, Evanston shoppers won't have to choose, if the city embraces a proposal that would eliminate both options.
In recent years, bans on plastic bags have taken hold in jurisdictions dotting the United States. Other communities have placed a tax on disposable bags to discourage consumption. In Evanston, City Council members on Monday discussed a potential ban on both paper and plastic.
If that were to pass, Evanston would become the first Illinois municipality to ban disposable bags, experts said. And a prohibition on paper would be among the most restrictive bag laws nationwide, they added.
While council members worried about the bags' environmental impact, some shoppers voiced trepidation about being boxed in by bag options.
"I think a ban would be more of a nuisance,'' shopper Tom Krebs said outside an Evanston Dominick's store. "I'm sure a lot of people would roll their eyes."

Advertisement

Yet ban proponents on the council say the city needs to act.
"I hate plastic bags, and I'm prepared to vote tonight to eliminate plastic bags or brown paper bags — whatever it takes to get rid of them," said Ald. Ann Rainey.
The proposal remains in its infancy, and the logistics of how a ban would be implemented aren't clear. City officials plan to meet with small-business owners, national chain store representatives and residents to discuss the possible bag ban before revisiting the topic at a May 23 committee meeting.
Any restrictions would put Evanston in league with an expanding group of jurisdictions that have taken a variety of tacks toward coaxing shoppers to tote reusable bags.
San Francisco banned plastic bags outright in 2007, and a handful of other California municipalities have followed. North Carolina outlawed plastic bags on the islands of its Outer Banks, and Washington, D.C., levied a 5-cent tax on paper and plastic bags.
The city of Chicago requires retailers that offer plastic bags to reuse or recycle them.
No state has yet enacted a statewide ban, fee or tax on bags, but at least 11 states this year have proposed legislation on the topic, said Douglas Shinkle of the National Conference of State Legislatures. Bills governing bags have been shot down in various states in recent years, he said.
"This is a relatively fertile issue," he said. "Thus far, (restrictions on bags) haven't been successful, but who knows if that may change."

NFL, Players Face Off in Court

By MATTHEW FUTTERMAN

Nearly a month after negotiations for a new collective-bargaining agreement collapsed, lawyers for the NFL and the league's players association squared off in court Wednesday in a crucial hearing that will help determine whether there will be a 2011 season.
The hearing in front of U.S. District Court Judge Susan Richard Nelson in St. Paul, Minn., is the first major step in the case of Tom Brady vs. the National Football League that is being closely watched by both football fans and legal experts.

Sports Labor Disputes

Take a look back at some of the disputes that have upset play in major-league sports.

Players are seeking an injunction that would end the current lockout, while owners are trying to maintain the status quo in hopes of forcing the players to return to collective bargaining. Owners are hoping that by locking out the players and withholding pay, a critical mass of the rank-and-file will break with the leadership and push for a new deal that includes concessions.
During the initial arguments Wednesday morning Judge Nelson peppered lawyers for both sides with questions, but she was particularly hard on David Boies, who is representing the NFL. Mr. Boies acknowledged the awkwardness of his position—telling a federal judge she didn't have jurisdiction and should defer to the National Labor Relations Board. In response, Judge Nelson asked Mr. Boies if the NFL could lock out the players indefinitely while waiting for an NLRB decision that might take years—and how could she balance that with the harm the players were enduring by not being able to work? Jim Quinn, a lawyer for the players, noted there were no precedent cases similar to this one because, noting how odd it was for a business to challenge a union's decertification and impose a lockout, "no one would dare do what the NFL has done here."
The hearing was expected to last into Wednesday afternoon, and it remained unclear whether the judge would make a ruling. At one point, she suggested the solution shouldn't rest with her. "It's possible you could sit down and work out a plan," she said. Mr. Quinn said they had tried that and failed.
After nearly two years of talks and three weeks of federal mediation, discussions broke down on March 11. The NFL Players Association decided to decertify as a labor organization. The players had to decertify as a union for collective bargaining purposes in order to be able to seek relief in the courts under the antitrust laws. They sued the league for antitrust violations in federal court just hours before the collective-bargaining agreement expired.
Owners subsequently locked out the players. They have labeled the decertification an end-run around the collective-bargaining process and filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board attempting to block it. The NLRB has launched an investigation into the matter.
Under the previous agreement, players had been receiving 51% of revenue. Owners want to cut that. Projected revenue for 2011 is $9.4 billion.
Both sides were keeping quiet in the days leading up to the hearing. No talks have taken place since March 11, with lawyers for each side focusing on the initial decisions of a case that has turned labor law on its head.
"In the typical industry, employees fight to be part of a union and management fears the power of these unions," said Gabe Feldman, director of the sports law program at the Tulane University School of Law. "In this context, the employees are fighting to dissolve their union while management fears the absence of the union. Whatever Judge Nelson decides after the hearing on Wednesday will create the law in this area."

Despite extensive legal briefs, it's unclear whether Judge Nelson will rule from the bench or take additional time to decide.
For the players, the hearing marks a return to the venue where they have achieved most of their gains during the past two decades, including the right for players to sell their services to the highest bidder.
Owners, on the other hand, are trying to have the case dismissed as quickly as possible, arguing the two sides should settle their disputes through collective bargaining.
"Litigation is not going to solve this problem," NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said recently. "The faster we can get back to mediation, the faster we will get an agreement and the fairer it will be."
The prospect of lengthy litigation is particularly precarious for the owners, since damages are triple if a trial determines owners violated antitrust laws.
However, Matthew Cantor, an antitrust lawyer with New York-based Constantine Cannon said the players' biggest obstacle to convincing Judge Nelson to lift the lockout may be proving that monetary damages won't fully compensate them for the supposedly irreparable harm they will endure.
"Even for the players who don't have contracts, it's pretty easy to calculate how much money they would lose," Mr. Cantor said.

Players-association officials have pointed out that NFL careers are notoriously short—less than four years on average—making any lost time potentially critical to a player's career.
The case is taking place in Minnesota because the federal courts there have overseen the NFL's labor cases since the late 1980s, when a group of players sued the league there to win the right to free agency. Those cases were ultimately settled in 1992 and 1993 when the league and the players association came up with a collective-bargaining agreement that provided players with a path to free agency but included a strict limit of how much each team could spend on player salaries.
The agreement was extended repeatedly, with minor adjustments. It remained a part of the settlement, though, and as a result, the U.S. District Court in Minnesota has continued to hear the subsequent NFL labor disputes. U.S. District Court Judge David Doty has usually heard the cases, and he has a consistent record of ruling in favor of the players.
In fact, the league has had such little success in court that a primary goal for them during the standoff is to remove federal judicial oversight from the labor process, a burden the other major sports leagues in the U.S. don't have to endure. Judge Doty recently delivered a blow to the owners when he ruled some $4 billion in broadcast revenue may have to be placed in escrow during the lockout because the league violated its obligation to seek the highest price for its media rights
Not every case ends up in front of Judge Doty, but the players association has no complaints that this one landed in Judge Nelson's court. "She's a very smart and fair-minded judge," Jeffrey Kessler, a longtime players-association lawyer said during a recent interview. "Judges like that are usually very good for the players."