Posts Tagged ‘Facebook’
An autopsy performed on her body earlier Tuesday revealed the cause of death to be blunt force trauma and strangulation.
Investigators say there were no signs of sexual assault.
At this point, the names of the two teenagers are not being released.
Fox 29 cameras recorded exclusive video as the two teenagers were escorted by investigators into the prosecutor’s office in Gloucester County, where they turned themselves in (You can see the video above this story and a picture to the right).
It appears Pasquale was lured to a home where the murder was committed, investigators said. Police say they executed a search warrant on the home, where they found her personal belongings, including her bike and other pieces of evidence.
Investigators say a parent caught wind that something was going on with the two boys based on a Facebook post. The parent then notified police, which led them to the home and Pasquale’s body.
Pasquale’s body was discovered stuffed inside a recycling bin not far from her Clayton home. She was reported missing Saturday.
As many as 20 different law enforcement agencies were involved in the search.
Although the administration’s request was unusual, for Google, it represented the kind of delicate balancing act that Internet companies confront every day.
These companies, which include communications media like Facebook and Twitter, write their own edicts about what kind of expression is allowed, things as diverse as pointed political criticism, nudity and notions as murky as hate speech. And their employees work around the clock to check when users run afoul of their rules.
Facebook confirmed that it had blocked links to the video in Pakistan, where it violates the country’s blasphemy law. A spokeswoman said Facebook had also removed a post that contained a threat to a United States ambassador, after receiving a report from the State Department; Facebook has declined to say in which country the ambassador worked.
“Because these speech platforms are so important, the decisions they take become jurisprudence,” said Andrew McLaughlin, who has worked for both Google and the White House. Most vexing among those decisions are ones that involve whether a form of expression is hate speech.
Hate speech has no universally accepted definition, legal experts say. And countries, including democratic ones, have widely divergent legal approaches to regulating speech they consider to be offensive or inflammatory.
Europe bans neo-Nazi speech, for instance, but courts there have also banned material that offends the religious sensibilities of one group or another. Indian law frowns on speech that could threaten public order.
Turkey can shut down a Web site that insults its founding president, Kemal Ataturk. Like the countries, the Internet companies have their own positions, which give them wide latitude on how to interpret expression in different countries.
Although Google says the anti-Islamic video, “Innocence of Muslims,” was not hate speech, it restricted access to the video in Libya and Egypt because of the extraordinarily delicate situation on the ground and out of respect for cultural norms.
Google has not yet explained why its cultural norms edict applied to only two countries and not others, where Muslim sensitivities have been demonstrably offended.
Free speech absolutists say all expression, no matter how despicable, should be allowed online. Others say Internet companies, like governments, should be flexible enough to exercise restraint under exceptional circumstances, especially when lives are at stake.
At any rate, as Mark L. Movsesian, a law professor at St. John’s University, pointed out, any effort to ban hateful or offensive speech worldwide would be virtually impossible, if not counterproductive.
“The regimes are so different, it’s very, very difficult to come up with one answer — unless you ban everything,” he said.
Unlike Google, Twitter does not explicitly address hate speech, but it says in its rule book that “users are allowed to post content, including potentially inflammatory content, provided they do not violate the Twitter Terms of Service and Rules.” Those include a prohibition against “direct, specific threats of violence against others.”
That wide margin for speech sometimes lands Twitter in feuds with governments and lobbyists. Twitter was pressed this summer to take down several accounts the Indian government considered offensive. Company officials agreed to remove only those that blatantly impersonated others; impersonation violates company rules, unless the user makes it clear that it is satirical.
Facebook has some of the industry’s strictest rules. Terrorist organisations are not permitted on the social network, according to the company’s terms of service. In recent years, the company has repeatedly shut down fan pages set up by Hezbollah.
In a statement after the killings of United States Embassy employees in Libya, the company said, “Facebook’s policy prohibits content that threatens or organises violence, or praises violent organisations.”
Facebook also explicitly prohibits what it calls “hate speech,” which it defines as attacking a person. In addition, it allows users to report content they find objectionable, which Facebook employees then vet. Facebook’s algorithms also pick up certain words that are then sent to human inspectors to review; the company declined to provide details on what kinds of words set off that kind of review.
Nudity is forbidden on Facebook, too. This year, that policy enmeshed the social network in a controversy over photographs of breast-feeding women. Facebook pages were set up by groups that objected to the company’s ban on pictures of exposed breasts, and “nurse-ins” were organised, calling on women to breast-feed outside Facebook offices worldwide.
The company said sharing breast-feeding photos was fine, but “photos that show a fully exposed breast where the child is not actively engaged in nursing do violate Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities.”
Just this month, a New Yorker cartoon tripped over Facebook’s rules on exposed breasts. On its Facebook page, the magazine displayed a cartoon that contained the topless figures of a man and women. The illustration was removed for violating Facebook’s naked breast decree.
Facebook soon corrected itself. With “hundreds of thousands” of reported complaints each week, the company said, sometimes it makes a mistake.
Teenage Girls Laugh and Joke as They ‘Beat Mentally Disabled Man and Post the Sick Video on Youtube’Monday, July 16th, 2012
The incident happened about two weeks ago in Caruthersville, Missouri.
They can be heard laughing and joking as one of the girls reign punches and kicks the man’s head.
She then shows her swollen knuckles to the camera to demonstrate how hard she was punching.
The girls are in juvenile custody and were due in court yesterday on undisclosed juvenile charges.
Prosecutors are also considering charges against a man who is seen with the girls in the video clip.
He told KFVS-TV that Crocker threw the first punch, something the homeless man denies.
Crocker told the station the girls simply attacked him.
‘I told her (one of the girls) to leave me alone,’ he said. ‘She’s 15. I said “Baby leave me alone”. I mind my own business, and I sit here and I drink.’
He said he refused to fight back because the attackers were girls.
‘My mama always told me before she died, “You hit a woman you’re not a man”,’ said Crocker.
He said he wasn’t seriously hurt, but he thinks the girls should be punished.
Police Chief Tony Jones said Crocker is well-known in town as an eccentric.
Crocker has been known to dance on people’s porches, but he’s harmless, Jones said.
‘It was horrible, plain out horrible. There’s a lot of angry people,’ Jones said. ‘I am one of them.’
Crocker admitted to the station that he was drunk that day, but his family said that’s no excuse.
‘He didn’t deserve this,’ said Racheal Self, a relative of Crocker’s.
‘They knew he’s not mentally right, and I just want to see justice served and this not happen to anyone else,’ Self said.
Digging through Facebook late at night always brings out hilarious surprises, especially when it’s the individual pages of our local politicos, where we can see their personal stupidity in all its glory. Who can forget Congresswomen Loretta andLinda Sanchez dressed as a sexy angel and banana, respectively, for Halloween, or Orange councilmember Jon Dumitru’s anti-Muslim, anti-spelling rant?
And so that’s how I found out Placentia councilmember Chad Wanke, he of the coded anti-Mexican language in claiming budget frugality, is Facebook pals with neo-Nazis.
One of them is Travis Wanke, who among the many neo-Nazis tattoos on his body has this precious ink:
|Screen shot from Travis Wanke’s Facebook page|
Wanke has an extensive criminal record, best of which was his 2007 arrest for allegedly assaulting an African-American man in Santa Clarita while shouting racial epithets. According to the Anti-Defamation League, Travis belonged to the Deadline Skins, whose members “‘earn’ a tattoo of a pair of combat boots with red laces on the left side of their torso after committing a violent act and spilling the blood of a non-white individual.”
Fun! Chad’s other friend is Carl Wanke:
|Screen shot from Carl Wanke’s Facebook page|
|Carl, at left, with two other upstanding citizens|
Check out those swastikas peeking out from Carl’s wife-beater! Carl was once arrested for burglary, but those charges were dismissed. His FB page is filled with shots with other neo-Nutzis.
Now, given that Chad, Travis, and Carl share the Wanke name, I’m betting Fuhrers to SS that they’re probably cousins, which is the excuse Chad will use when justifying why he’s friends with neo-Nazis–blood is thicker than water, you know? Can’t avoid family? Bullshit! I got cousins who are, um, shady, and I sure as hell don’t talk to them, let alone let the world know I’m on friendly terms with them on Facebook. Wanke can befriend anyone he damn well pleases–but his critics also have the right to spin it whatever way they want. And you know they will! So let’s see you repudiate your pals, Chad: the comments section is yours!
On the backfoot over deterioration of law and order in the Uttar Pradesh (UP) after it came to power in March earlier this year, theSamajwadi Party (SP) government released crime stats in the state assembly claiming that between March 1 to April 15, only 699 cases of murder, 263 rape cases and 249 incidents of loot have taken place in the state. The figures were released on a query raised by Bhartiya Janta Party member of legislative assembly, Suresh Kumar Khanna.
The government also informed that between April 1, 2011, and November 30, 2011, around 3161 murders, 1164 rapes and 1831 incidents of loot took place in the state. Though the SP government had taken charge on March 15, it released figures of previous regime as well as that of first 15 days in the month of March to show that the rate of crime has not increased. It also stated that chief minister Akhilesh Yadav has given strict instructions to maintain law and order. He has also issued warning of action against officers found to be lax in discharging their duties. The government claimed that law and order is under control and it will improve further in coming days.
The opposition parties, however, rejected government figures claiming that in many cases police does not register FIRs to keep crime rate down on papers.. They said that even if government stats are considered to be true, the per day average of murder in 45 days from March 1 to April 15 comes out to 15, rape to 6 and loot to 5.
Interestingly, the government data shows crime rate higher than the what Bahujan Samaj Party(BSP) chief Mayawati claimed at a press conference last month. Mayawati had then claimed that after SP came to power, between March 15 and May 24, 800 murders, 270 rapes, 256 kidnappings and 720 loots have taken place in the state. According to the figures quoted by Mayawati, average murders per day come out to be 11, 4 cases of rape and 10 cases of robbery.
If one takes into account the crime figures of 244 days from April 1 to November 30, per day murders come out to be 13, rape — four and loot — seven. This is also less than the average crime in SP regime.
Meanwhile, opposition’s allegation on breakdown of law and order seems to be true considering the fact that apart from increase in crime rate, there have been around 17 incidents in which police was assaulted by the criminals and mobs in different parts of the state. Around 19 ministers in SP government have criminal records. Durga Yadav, a minister, had recently created a controversy by saying that ‘even God cannot control crime’.
Update: Gheen has now replied to KGUN9′s demand for an apology to our viewer, to our demand for retraction of his many false and defamatory statements, and to our request for more information regarding his complaint about our coverage of his ban from our Facebook page. See the footnote at the bottom of this page.
The head of the Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee, or ALIPAC, is not taking his exile from KGUN9′s Facebook page well. On Thursday he sent me a private Facebook message accusing me of lying about the Facebook exchange that got him banned, and promising to seek legal action.
Gheen also posted messages on his ALIPAC Facebook page saying much the same thing. After calling me “a serial liar,” Gheen wrote that I am now claiming that he “threatened someone online while hiding the post that exonerates me from his false claim.”
In response to Gheen’s latest attack, KGUN9 News is making available the full Facebook exchange that led to his posting ban. Viewers can decide for themselves whether any of the posts helps Gheen’s argument or disproves anything that KGUN9 News has reported. That exchange is available in the “Related Documents” section above at left (or click here.) It is unedited except to remove the name of the viewer in question in order to protect her privacy.
On Thursday night I responded to Gheen’s message and offered run a correction or retraction if he can demonstrate that any statement made by anyone at KGUN9 News regarding the events leading up to his ban from our sites is incorrect. I also sent him a detailed demand for retraction in regards to numerous false statements he has made about me and KGUN9 News over the past week, and also asked him, again, to apologize to our viewer. By the close of business on Friday, I had yet to get a reply.* (See update at the bottom of this page).
This latest round in a week-long verbal cage fight with Gheen stems from an argument Gheen got into on Wednesday with a KGUN9 viewer on our Facebook page. When it turned personal, I warned Gheen to drop it or he would be banned from posting. Gheen ignored the warning.
I banned this national newsmaker from communicating directly with our viewers only with the greatest reluctance. In pursuit of allowing a vigorous public debate on this issue, KGUN9 News let Gheen post attacks on KGUN9 News multiple times a day for the past several days. I challenged him on his falsehoods but let him continue to post his broadsides, even after they turned intensely personal and increasingly defamatory, ugly, demeaning and insulting.
But on Wednesday afternoon, Gheen chose to focus his tirade on a KGUN9 viewer. He made the incredible suggestion that it might be a good learning experience for her if ALIPAC were to send out a press release to the entire state of Arizona claiming that this particular viewer supports Nazis.
I applaud this viewer for her courage. Having seen Gheen’s treatment of me and KGUN9, she had to know what kind of response she might get. But she went ahead anyway, and with just two posts she did a better job of responding to Gheen than I did in several days of back-and-forth messages. But in return for expressing an opposing viewpoint, this viewer wound up having the attention of a nationally registered political action committee focused right on her in a personal and potentially unnerving way.
That was unacceptable.
In response, I told Gheen that he would not be allowed to bully, intimidate or harass our viewers. I warned him that if he were to post another response to this viewer in any context other than that of an apology, I would ban him from the site.
Gheen did respond, did mention the viewer, and did not apologize. Instead, he defended his actions and repeated his offer to subject her to what he now called an “empathy study.”
Dude — offering to subject a private individual with whom you have a political disagreement to a traumatizing “study” is so not cool. How is it that you don’t get that?
It does seem obvious to me from his post that he was hoping that this would provoke a ban from KGUN9′s sites. His closing words to me were: “I guess now is a good time to let you know that lots of people have contacted us about all of the posts that you deleted beneath KGUN 9 articles that were critical of your positions. No wonder you are threatening me with the same. Go ahead and prove your weakness and intolerance Mr. Forrest. You go hit that button you big man you.”
Done. I regret having to do it, because I knew that the move would immediately play into Gheen’s hands and give him fresh ammunition. I’m certain that this was his intent. In Wednesday night’s version of this story, I wrote, “Now Gheen gets to retreat to his ALIPAC site and Facebook page and claim that KGUN9, a hotbed of liberalism, kicked him off its Facebook page in order to stifle his conservative political views. I’ll bet the posts are going up right now, with claims to the effect of, “KGUN9 bans conservative viewpoints! That lying, liberal, totalitarian news director Forrest Carr couldn’t stand the heat!”
By the next day, Gheen had indeed posted an accusation along those lines, using two of the three exact words I had predicted. Surprisingly, he forgot to include the word “liberal,” a label he slapped on me seven times in his open letter last week. In its place he substituted a new word that’s not nearly as good. As a result, I now have to settle for the title of “lying totalitarian coward.” Too bad. “Lying liberal totalitarian” trips off the tongue so much better. I was looking forward to putting that on my business card. I was even planning to get a new phone number to go with it: Dial LLT-NEWS! I think that would look good on billboards.
By the way, can you be a “totalitarian” and a “coward” at the same time? The two concepts don’t seem compatible. Just sayin’.
Come to think of it, nor are the concepts of “liberal” and “totalitarian.” In fact, the two labels are mutually exclusive. You can’t be both at the same time. Bill, I think you are going to have to retract some of the insults you’ve hurled in my direction, if only for the sake of internal consistency.
This all ended the way it had started, with a KGUN9 viewer. The spark was a single viewer-submitted question that KGUN9 News asked of Congressional candidate Jesse Kelly. The viewer wanted to know why, given allegations from U.S. Senator John McCain and the Anti-Defamation League that ALIPAC is backed by white supremacists and the like, Kelly accepted ALIPAC’s 2010 endorsement.
The Anti-Defamation League is credible and its accusations were well sourced. The Southern Poverty Law Center, which in the past has accused Gheen of racist comments, and has claimed that ALIPAC has had backing from at least one hate group, also is credible. John McCain cited some of these allegations in making his attacks on ALIPAC. As a nationally respected politician, his comments were newsworthy.
KGUN9 has not claimed, nor does it claim now, that the allegations have been proved, only that they are credible, newsworthy, and appropriate subject matter for political coverage. That is why we relayed our viewer’s question to Jesse Kelly, who sought and accepted ALIPAC’s 2010 endorsement. The question was valid and remains so given ALIPAC’s renewed endorsement.
Gheen has pointed out to KGUN9 that ALIPAC can’t be held responsible for extremist groups that might repost material from ALIPAC’s site. If, for the sake of argument, some of ALIPAC’s material is the kind that some extremist groups might find attractive, does that mean ALIPAC itself is extremist? Should ALIPAC be judged by the character of everyone — and anyone – with whom its message might resonate? Should anyone care or find it surprising that two left-leaning groups would attack a right-wing political action committee? These are good questions. KGUN9 does not propose to answer them. We urge you instead to ponder the matter and make up your own mind.
To assist you, KGUN9 explored the ALIPAC issue in 2010 and again last week. We’ve published several TV and web stories, and I have engaged Gheen and his followers on KGUN9′s Facebook page as well. We stand by our reporting. Those of you who’ve been following along have heard Gheen’s defense in detail. You’ve seen firsthand how he conducts himself. With that information, you should have enough facts and observations to make up your own mind about his character, that of the organization he leads, and what effect, if any, ALIPAC’s endorsement should have on the race for Arizona Congressional District 8.
Jesse Kelly chose not to answer our viewer’s question. That is his right. But his campaign spokesman tore into our anchor, Jennifer Waddell, calling the question improper and indicative of a low standard of journalism ethics. The spokesman repeated that assertion to me personally a few days later. Then Gheen took up the attack, expressing himself even more forcefully, launching a week-long bullying campaign directed against KGUN9 and me personally, using lies, personal insults and epithets (I counted 34 uses of the term “liar” or similar terms directed at me personally before Gheen’s latest posts) the likes of which I have not experienced in 32 years of service in the journalism profession. It seems clear Gheen was doing everything he could, using whatever tactics were necessary, to discredit and hold up to public ridicule our newsroom and me personally, so as to neutralize a viewer question that neither Gheen nor Kelly’s spokesman wanted you, the voter, to hear.
Yes, we agree that Kelly had every right not to answer the question. But here is where we part company. Our viewer had every right to ask it. So did KGUN9. There is a term for societies where citizens and journalists are not allowed to ask questions of those in power, or who would be in power. They are called “totalitarian.”
Wow, there’s that word again. This time, Mr. Gheen, you might take note its proper use.
*Monday update: In a response by email sent Monday morning, Gheen did not apologize for his treatment of our viewer, and instead continued to defend the comments that he had directed to her. Nor did he retract or apologize for any of the 54 false and defamatory statements that I had detailed for him in the demand for retraction I sent him on Friday. Gheen reasserted his claim that KGUN9′s reporting about ALIPAC has been false. Gheen did not, however, point to any specific statement regarding KGUN9′s reporting of his ban from our website that he felt was false, and he withdrew his statement that he intended to seek a legal remedy.
In defending himself against statements by the Anti-Defamation League that white supremacists and the like have promoted ALIPAC and taken action on its behalf, Gheen admitted that someone he called “a real skinhead” might have “made some posts” on certain websites. But he denied that such posts constitute “evidence of ‘ties’ and ‘backing’ by ‘neo nazis” in support of ALIPAC.
While making that admission, Gheen also put forth a new theory, claiming that such posts appearing to come from neo-Nazi elements also might have been placed on such websites by an “ADL operative posing as an anonymous racist.” Gheen offered no evidence in support of that claim.