Ex-LA Cop Sought in Shootings of 3 Cops, 2 Slayings

0 comments












Police in Southern California say they suspect that a fired cop is connected to the shootings -- one fatal -- of three police officers this morning, as well as the weekend slayings of an assistant women's college basketball coach and her fiancé in what cops believe are acts of revenge against the LAPD, as suggested in the suspect's online manifesto.


Former police officer Christopher Jordan Dorner, 33, who's a U.S. Navy reservist, has been publically named as a suspect in the killings of Monica Quan, 28, and her 27-year-old fiancé, Keith Lawrence, Irvine police Chief David L. Maggard said at a news conference Wednesday night.


"We are considering him armed and dangerous," Lt. Julia Engen of the Irvine Police Department said.


Police say Dorner shot at four officers in two incidents overnight, hitting three of them: one in Corona, Calif., and two in Riverside, Calif.


Sgt. Rudy Lopez of the LAPD said two LAPD officers were in Corona and headed out on special detail to check on one of the individuals named in Dorner's manifesto. Dorner allegedly grazed one of them but missed the other.


"[This is an] extremely tense situation," Lopez said. "We call this a manhunt. We approach it cautiously because of the propensity of what has already happened."


The Riverside Police Department said two of its officers were shot before one of them died, KABC-TV reported. The extent of the other's injuries is unclear.
Police suspected a connection to Dorner.








Missing Ohio Mother: Manhunt for Ex-Boyfriend Watch Video









"They were on routine patrol stopped at a stop light when they were ambushed," Lt. Guy Toussant of the Riverside police department said.


A badge and identification belonging to Dorner have been found in San Diego, according to San Diego police Sgt. Ray Battrick. Dorner's LAPD badge and ID were found by someone near the city's airport, and turned in to police overnight, The Associated Press reported.


Police around Southern California are wearing tactical gear, including helmets and guns across their chests. The light-up signs along California highways show the license plate number of Dorner's car, and say to call 911 if it is seen. The problem, police say, is that they believe Dorner is switching license plates on his car, a 2005 charcoal-gray Nissan Titan pickup truck.


Lawrence was found slumped behind the wheel of his white Kia in the parking lot of their upscale apartment complex in Irvine Sunday and Quan was in the passenger seat.


"A particular interest at this point in the investigation is a multi-page manifesto in which the suspect has implicated himself in the slayings," Maggard said.


Police said Dorner's manifesto included threats against members of the LAPD. Police say they are taking extra measures to ensure the safety of officers and their families.


The document, allegedly posted on an Internet message board this week, apparently blames Quan's father, retired LAPD Capt. Randy Quan, for his firing from the department.


"Your lack of ethics and conspiring to wrong a just individual are over," he allegedly wrote.


One passage from the manifesto reads, "I will bring unconventional and asymmetrical warfare to those in LAPD uniform whether on or off duty."


"I never had the opportunity to have a family of my own," it reads. "I'm terminating yours."


Dorner was with the department from 2005 until 2008, when he was fired for making false statements.


Randy Quan, who became a lawyer in retirement, represented Dorner in front of the Board of Rights, a tribunal that ruled against Dorner at the time of his dismissal, LAPD Capt. William Hayes told The Associated Press Wednesday night.


According to documents from a court of appeals hearing in October 2011, Dorner was fired from the LAPD after he made a complaint against his field-training officer, Sgt. Teresa Evans, saying in the course of an arrest she had kicked a suspect who was a schizophrenic with severe dementia.


After an investigation, Dorner was fired for making false statements.






Read More..

Royal Bank of Scotland fined US$612m to settle Libor probe

0 comments





LONDON : State-rescued Royal Bank of Scotland will pay fines totalling US$612 million (453 million euros) to US and British regulators to settle allegations of Libor interest rate rigging, it announced on Wednesday.

RBS is the third bank to admit its part in the Libor affair after British rival Barclays and Swiss lender UBS.

The investigations uncovered "wrongdoing" by 21 employees, predominantly in relation to the setting of the bank's yen and Swiss franc Libor submissions between October 2006 to November 2010, the bank said.

RBS added it had been fined US$325 million by the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission, US$150 million by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) and US$137 million by Britain's Financial Services Authority.

The bank has also entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with the DoJ, in relation to one count of wire fraud relating to Swiss franc Libor and one count for an antitrust violation relating to yen Libor.

RBS Securities Japan Limited has agreed to enter a plea of guilty to one count of wire fraud relating to Yen Libor, it added in the statement.

British finance minister George Osborne condemned the "totally unacceptable" behaviour at the bailed-out bank and insisted the taxpayer would not pick up the bill.

"Those responsible will face the full force of the law," Osborne told reporters.

The Edinburgh-based lender was rescued with taxpayers' cash at the height of the global financial crisis.

John Hourican, chief executive of the bank's Markets and International Banking division, is meanwhile to leave RBS and will forfeit his 2012 bonus and long-term incentive shares.

"This is a sad day for RBS, but also an important one in continuing to put right the mistakes of the past," Royal Bank of Scotland chairman Philip Hampton said in the statement.

"That is why those responsible have left the organisation or been subject to disciplinary action."

RBS said its derivative traders sought to influence the bank's yen and Swiss franc Libor setters over the four-year period.

"Two RBS traders based in London colluded with other banks and brokers in making and receiving requests for higher and lower" rates, it said.

The total fines handed down to RBS are more than those handed last year to Barclays for attempted Libor rate-rigging, but less than the amount paid by UBS for similar offences.

Libor, or London Interbank Offered Rate, is a flagship instrument used all over the world, affecting what banks, businesses and individuals pay to borrow money. Euribor is the eurozone equivalent.

Libor is calculated daily, using estimates from banks of their own interbank rates, and affects the pricing of more than $300-trillion of contracts across the world, according to British regulator, the Financial Services Authority.

But the system has been found to be open to abuse, with some traders lying about borrowing costs to boost trading positions or make their bank seem more secure -- seriously damaging the reputation of the 'City of London' financial centre.

At Swiss bank UBS, two former employees were charged in December when the group's Securities Japan unit settled similar allegations with US and British authorities for US$1.5 billion, the biggest amount to date.

The British government owns most of RBS after a massive bailout of the bank and there is considerable pressure for senior bank executives to take responsibility for the Libor crisis.

Barclays bank in June agreed to pay about US$450 million in connection with the affair, which led to the resignations of three Barclays senior board members, including chief executive Bob Diamond.

More than a dozen other institutions remain under investigation, while last October the British government announced plans to make it a criminal offence to manipulate Libor.

- AFP/ch



Read More..

Pentagon chief: Military faces 'readiness crisis'

0 comments



STORY HIGHLIGHTS


  • NEW: Speaker Boehner accuses Democrats of avoiding needed spending cuts

  • Secretary Panetta says political partisanship threatens U.S. stability

  • "This is not a game. This is reality," Panetta says of reduced readiness

  • The across-the-board cuts will take effect March 1 unless Congress acts




Washington (CNN) -- Furloughed workers, reduced combat readiness, shrunken naval operations and cuts to Air Force flying hours and weapons maintenance.


Defense Secretary Leon Panetta listed those consequences as he provided a stark warning Wednesday about the effects of impending budget cuts on the military. The result, he said, would be "the most serious readiness crisis" faced by the military in over a decade.


Panetta's address at Georgetown University in Washington, which he called "hopefully one of my last speeches as secretary of defense," included the first details of how the Pentagon would deal with the automatic spending cuts -- or sequestration in congressional jargon -- set to trigger March 1.


For the Department of Defense, sequestration means $46 billion in spending cuts this year, which would result in "a serious disruption in defense programs and a sharp decline in our military readiness," Panetta said.








Opinion: How to avoid job-killing budget cuts


"There are no good options" to deal with the situation, he continued, saying 46,000 department jobs would be at risk and more damaging measures in coming months could include:


-- Furloughing as many as 800,000 civilian workers for up to 22 days;


-- Cutting back on Army training and maintenance, which would reduce readiness of combat brigades outside Afghanistan;


-- Shrinking naval operations; and,


-- Reducing Air Force flying hours and weapons systems maintenance.


"This is not a game. This is reality," Panetta said, his voice rising. "These steps would seriously damage a fragile American economy and they would degrade our ability to respond to crisis precisely at a time of rising instability across the globe."


His comments sought to increase pressure on Republicans and Democrats to reach agreement on deficit-reduction steps, thereby avoiding the across-the-board spending cuts of sequestration that were part of a 2011 deal that raised the federal debt ceiling.


On Tuesday, President Barack Obama called for a short-term deal to put off the cuts so Congress could continue work on a permanent fix that provides desired reductions in the federal deficit.


Obama made clear that he still wants a broader deficit-reduction agreement with Republicans that includes spending cuts, entitlement reforms and increased revenue from eliminating some tax breaks.


However, Obama said, with time running out before the sequestration cuts slash government spending and result in job losses and economic slowdown, Congress should pass a temporary fix that would allow time for further negotiations on a broader plan.


"Our economy right now is headed in the right direction and it will stay that way as long as there aren't any more self-inflicted wounds coming out of Washington," he said. "So let's keep on chipping away at this problem together, as Democrats and Republicans, to give our workers and our businesses the support that they need to thrive in the weeks and months ahead."


In response, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, accused Obama and Democrats of avoiding needed spending cuts and trying put off tough decisions instead of facing their responsibilities as elected leaders.


"At some point, Washington has to deal with its spending problem," Boehner told reporters Wednesday. "I've watched them kick this can down the road for 22 years. I've had enough of it. It's time to act."


He also echoed Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky in saying that further deficit-reduction steps should focus on spending cuts and reforming entitlement programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, rejecting Obama's call for including more tax revenue in the mix.


Opinion: Republicans, be smart about defense cuts


In the 2011 debt ceiling deal that ended a showdown over whether to increase the federal government's borrowing limit to meet its obligations, Congress and the White House agreed to include the automatic spending cuts of sequestration as motivation to pass a comprehensive deficit-reduction plan.


Deep partisan divisions prevented such an agreement from happening in 2012, an election year. Initially the cuts were to go into effect on January 2, but the government delayed the impact of sequestration for the first two months of 2013.


In his speech, Panetta referred to what he described as "partisan dysfunction in Congress" that he said threatens the quality of life and national security of the nation.


Instead of making tough decisions to resolve problems, political leaders from both parties let issues become crises that require immediate but insufficient responses, he said.


"It's the easy way out," Panetta said, adding that there is a price to be paid for such an approach.


"You lose the trust of the American people," he said. "You create an aura of constant uncertainty that pervades every issue and gradually undermines the very credibility of the nation."


Referring specifically to sequestration, he said: "There isn't anybody I've talked to on Capitol Hill that doesn't think this is crazy."


Obama said Tuesday that he still supports a broader deficit deal and made clear that revenue from tax reform measures previously agreed to by Republicans -- such as eliminating some loopholes to increase revenue for the government -- should be part of it.


However, he noted that it is unlikely Congress will reach a deficit-reduction deal by March 1 to render the sequestration cuts moot.


"If they can't get a bigger package done by the time the sequester is scheduled to go into effect, then I believe that they should at least pass a smaller package of spending cuts and tax reforms that would delay the economically damaging effects of the sequester for a few more months until Congress finds a way to replace these cuts with a smarter solution," Obama said.


Boehner reacted to news of Obama's plan by saying it was the president who "first proposed the sequester and insisted it become law."


Reiterating the longstanding position of Republicans in budget negotiations, Boehner called for replacing the sequester plan with spending cuts and reforms -- a reference to changes in entitlement programs.


A last-second agreement in the previous Congress that passed in the first days of 2013 raised tax rates on top income earners as part of a limited deficit-reduction package.


That measure followed weeks of tough negotiations involving Obama and Congress in which other steps to increase government revenue, such as eliminating some tax breaks for corporations, were considered but not included in the final deal.


How our tribes cause gridlock in Congress


Obama and Democrats now want such revenue-raising steps to be part of a package that would replace the mandated deficit reduction of the sequester cuts.


McConnell expressed his opposition to such a move Tuesday, saying, "The American people will not support more tax hikes in place of the meaningful spending reductions both parties already agreed to and the president signed into law."


Federal spending cuts under sequestration total more than $1 trillion over 10 years, half of which would come from the Pentagon.


Obama's push to avoid those cuts comes a week before he outlines his second-term agenda in the State of the Union address.


Congress, which authorizes federal spending, has failed to pass detailed annual budgets in recent years due to partisan gridlock over spending and debt, as well as electoral politics.


Instead, it has approved a series of extensions of past spending authorizations -- called continuing resolutions -- to keep the government funded.


Temporarily extending the sequester deadline would follow a similar move by congressional Republicans last month on raising the nation's debt ceiling. That deal put off further wrangling on the federal borrowing limit until mid-May.


Some analysts warn that Washington's fiscal paralysis harms the nation's fragile economy and could bring another recession.


CNN's Barbara Starr contributed to this report.






Read More..

Boy Scouts leaders make announcement on gay ban

0 comments

Updated at 11:07 a.m. ET

IRVING, Texas The Boy Scouts of America put off a decision Wednesday on whether to lift its ban on gay members and leaders, saying the question will be taken up at the organization's national meeting in May.

"After careful consideration and extensive dialogue within the Scouting family, along with comments from those outside the organization, the volunteer officers of the Boy Scouts of America's National Executive Board concluded that due to the complexity of this issue, the organization needs time for a more deliberate review of its membership policy," Deron Smith, the BSA director of public relations, said in a statement.

Smith said the organization's national executive board will prepare a resolution for the 1,400 voting members of the national council to consider. The annual meeting will take place in May 2013 in Grapevine, Texas.

BSA announced last week it was considering allowing troops to decide whether to allow gay membership. That news has placed a spotlight on executive board meetings that began Monday in Irving, Texas, where scouting headquarters is located.

Smith said last week that the board could take a vote Wednesday or decide to discuss the policy, but that the organization would issue a statement either way. Otherwise, the board has remained silent, with reporters barred from the hotel where its meetings are taking place.

At nearby BSA headquarters, a handful of Scouts and leaders delivered petitions Monday in support of letting gay members join. The conservative group Texas Values, meanwhile, had organized a Wednesday morning prayer vigil urging the Scouts to keep their policy the same.




Play Video


Obama on women in combat, gay Boy Scouts



President Obama, an opponent of the policy, and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, an Eagle Scout who supports it, both have weighed in.

"My attitude is that gays and lesbians should have access and opportunity the same way everybody else does in every institution and walk of life," said Mr. Obama, who as U.S. president is the honorary president of BSA, in a Sunday interview with CBS News.

Perry, the author of the book "On My Honor: Why the American Values of the Boy Scouts Are Worth Fighting For," said in a speech Saturday that "to have popular culture impact 100 years of their standards is inappropriate."

The board faces several choices, none of which is likely to quell controversy. Standing pat would go against the public wishes of two high-profile board members — Ernst & Young CEO James Turley and AT&T Inc. CEO Randall Stephenson — who run companies with nondiscrimination policies and have said they would work from within to change the Scouts' policy.

Conservatives have warned of mass defections if Scouting allows gay membership to be determined by troops. Local and regional leaders, as well as the leadership of churches that sponsor troops, would be forced to consider their own policies. And policy opponents who delivered four boxes of signatures to BSA headquarters Monday said they wouldn't be satisfied by only a partial acceptance of gay scouts and leaders.

"We don't want to see Scouting gerrymandered into blue and red districts," said Brad Hankins, campaign director of Scouts for Equality.

Read More..

US Postal Service to End Saturday Mail Delivery

0 comments




Feb 6, 2013 8:28am


gty us postal service lpl 130206 wblog U.S. Postal Service to End Saturday Mail Delivery

                                              (Image Credit: Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg via Getty Images)


Weekend mail delivery is about to come to an end.


The U.S. Postal Service will stop delivering mail on Saturdays, but will continue to deliver packages six days a week, the USPS announced at a news conference this morning.


While post offices that open on Saturdays will continue to do so, the initiative, which is expected to begin the week of August 5, will save an estimated $2 billion annually. The USPS had a $15.9 billion loss in financial year 2012.


“America’s mailing habits are changing and so are their shipping habits,” Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe said. “People will say this is a responsible decision. It makes common sense.”


The service reduction is the latest of Postal Service steps to cut costs as the independent agency of the U.S. government struggles with its finances.


To close its budget gap and reduce debt, it needs to generate $20 billion in cost reductions.


USPS officials have pushed for eliminating mail and package delivery on Saturdays for the past few years, but recent data showing growth in package delivery, which is up by 14 percent since 2010, and projected additional growth in the coming decade made them revise their decision to continue package delivery only.


Saturday mail delivery to P.O. boxes will also continue.


Research by the post office and major news organizations indicated that 7 out of 10 Americans support switching to five-day service.


Since 2006, the Postal Service has reduced annual costs by $15 billion, cut the career force by 28 percent and consolidated 200 mail-processing locations.


The USPS announced in May it was cutting back on the number of operating hours instead of shuttering 3,700 rural post offices. The move, which reduced hours of operation at 13,000 rural post offices from an eight-hour day to between two and six hours a day, was made with the aim of saving about $500 million per year.


The cutback in hours last year resulted in 9,000 full-time postal employees’ being reduced to part time plus the loss of their benefits, while another 4,000 full-time employees became part time but kept their benefits.



SHOWS: Good Morning America







Read More..

Richard III 'still the criminal king'

0 comments


















Richard III on stage and screen


Richard III on stage and screen


Richard III on stage and screen


Richard III on stage and screen


Richard III on stage and screen


Richard III on stage and screen


Richard III on stage and screen


Richard III on stage and screen


Richard III on stage and screen


Richard III on stage and screen


Richard III on stage and screen


Richard III on stage and screen





<<


<





1




2




3




4




5




6




7




8




9




10




11




12



>


>>







STORY HIGHLIGHTS


  • Dan Jones: Richard III's remains found; some see chance to redeem his bad reputation

  • Jones says the bones reveal and confirm his appearance, how he died and his injuries

  • Nothing changes his rep as a usurper of the Crown who likely had nephews killed, Jones says

  • Jones: Richard good or bad? Truth likely somewhere in between




Editor's note: Dan Jones is a historian and newspaper columnist based in London. His new book, "The Plantagenets" (Viking) is published in the US this Spring. Follow him on Twitter.


(CNN) -- Richard III is the king we British just can't seem to make our minds up about.


The monarch who reigned from 1483 to 1485 became, a century later, the blackest villain of Shakespeare's history plays. The three most commonly known facts of his life are that he stole the Crown, murdered his nephews and died wailing for a horse at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485. His death ushered in the Tudor dynasty, so Richard often suffers the dual ignominy of being named the last "medieval" king of England -- in which medieval is not held to be a good thing.


Like any black legend, much of it is slander.


Richard did indeed usurp the Crown and lose at Bosworth. He probably had his nephews killed too -- it is unknowable but overwhelmingly likely. Yet as his many supporters have been busy telling us since it was announced Monday that Richard's lost skeleton was found in a car park in Leicester, he wasn't all bad. In fact, he was for most of his life loyal and conscientious.



Dan Jones

Dan Jones



To fill you in, a news conference held at the University of Leicester Monday confirmed what archaeologists working there have suspected for months: that a skeleton removed from under a parking lot in the city center last fall was indeed the long-lost remains of Richard III.


His official burial place -- under the floor of a church belonging to the monastic order of the Greyfriars -- had been lost during the dissolution of the monasteries that was carried out in the 1530s under Henry VIII. A legend grew up that the bones had been thrown in a river. Today, we know they were not.


What do the bones tell us?


Well, they show that Richard -- identified by mitochondrial DNA tests against a Canadian descendant of his sister, Anne of York -- was about 5-foot-8, suffered curvature of the spine and had delicate limbs. He had been buried roughly and unceremoniously in a shallow grave too small for him, beneath the choir of the church.


He had died from a slicing blow to the back of the head sustained during battle and had suffered many other "humiliation injuries" after his death, including having a knife or dagger plunged into his hind parts. His hands may have been tied at his burial. A TV show aired Monday night in the UK was expected to show a facial reconstruction from the skull.


Opinion: What will the finding of Richard III mean?



In other words, we have quite a lot of either new or confirmed biographical information about Richard.


He was not a hunchback, but he was spindly and warped. He died unhorsed. He was buried where it was said he was buried. He very likely was, as one source had said, carried roughly across a horse's back from the battlefield where he died to Leicester, stripped naked and abused all the way.


All this is known today thanks to a superb piece of historical teamwork.


The interdisciplinary team at Leicester that worked toward Monday's revelations deserves huge plaudits. From the desk-based research that pinpointed the spot to dig, to the digging itself, to the bone analysis, the DNA work and the genealogy that identified Richard's descendants, all of it is worthy of the highest praise. Hat-tips, too, to the Richard III Society, as well as Leicester's City Council, which pulled together to make the project happen and also to publicize the society and city so effectively.


However, should anyone today tell you that Richard's skeleton somehow vindicates his historical reputation, you may tell them they are talking horsefeathers.


Back from the grave, King Richard III gets rehab






Richard III got a rep for a reason. He usurped the Crown from a 12-year old boy, who later died.


This was his great crime, and there is no point denying it. It is true that before this crime, Richard was a conspicuously loyal lieutenant to the boy's father, his own brother, King Edward IV. It is also true that once he was king, Richard made a great effort to promote justice to the poor and needy, stabilize royal finances and contain public disorder.


But this does not mitigate that he stole the Crown, justifying it after the fact with the claim that his nephews were illegitimate. Likewise, it remains indisputably true that his usurpation threw English politics, painstakingly restored to some order in the 12 years before his crime, into a turmoil from which it did not fully recover for another two decades.


So the discovery of Richard's bones is exciting. But it does not tell us anything to justify changing the current historical view of Richard: that the Tudor historians and propagandists, culminating with Shakespeare, may have exaggerated his physical deformities and the horrors of Richard's character, but he remains a criminal king whose actions wrought havoc on his realm.


Unfortunately, we don't all want to hear that. Richard remains the only king with a society devoted to rehabilitating his name, and it is a trait of some "Ricardians" to refuse to acknowledge any criticism of their hero whatever. So despite today's discovery, we Brits are likely to remain split on Richard down the old lines: murdering, crook-backed, dissembling Shakespearean monster versus misunderstood, loyal, enlightened, slandered hero. Which is the truth?


Somewhere in between. That's a classic historian's answer, isn't it? But it's also the truth.


Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.


Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.


The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Dan Jones.






Read More..

Afghanistan's Karzai confirms to leave power in 2014

0 comments





OSLO: Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai confirmed Tuesday in Oslo that he plans to step down next year when his mandate expires.

"The question of me staying as the president beyond 2014 is out of the question," Karzai said when reporters asked about recent speculation that he was keen to stay on.

"Neither am I seeking a third term, nor does the constitution allow it. There will be an election and a new president will come," he said.

Karzai was elected in 2004, and re-elected in 2009 in a vote marred by accusations of fraud.

Afghanistan's next presidential election is scheduled for April 2014, just a few months before the end of NATO's mission.

Karzai has previously said he would not stay in power beyond 2014, including at a meeting with US President Barack Obama last month, amid some concern that he could try to cling to power.

During his visit to Oslo, Norway said it would continue to help the country until 2017, with annual aid of 750 million kroner (101 million euros, $137 million). Afghanistan is one of the poorest countries in the world, and one of the most corrupt.

Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg said the aid agreement -- which formalises previously-made pledges -- would depend on Afghan authorities' commitment to "good governance, the rule of law, human rights, transparency and democracy."

"We have zero tolerance for corruption," he stressed, noting that Oslo had suspended development aid in the past when funds had been misappropriated.

Afghanistan, the second-biggest recipient of Norwegian aid, is ranked as one of the most corruption-riddled countries in the world alongside North Korea and Somalia, according to graft watchdog Transparency International.

-AFP/ac



Read More..