Hasta La Gadget!

Here’s a horror story straight out of your weirdest Mountain Dew-fueled nightmare: An Alaskan dentist recently charged with Medicaid fraud is also accused of pulling out an unconscious patient’s tooth while on a hoverboard. Radical!

Read more…

Legend, the company that dazzles up smartphones with a large dose of luxury, has taken the wraps off its new 24k gold and crocodile leather versions of the Galaxy S8 and the Galaxy S8 Plus. Both refined models are being offered in limited quantities; buyers get to choose between the ‘exotic leather’ edition or a different version featuring 24k gold … Continue reading

An Oregon man has been charged with attempted murder after he allegedly set another man on fire at a Denny’s restaurant in the city of Happy Valley.

According to the Clackamas County Sheriff’s Office, Deshaun James Swanger walked into the restaurant Wednesday night and sat down in a booth. 

The 24-year-old suspect then allegedly poured gasoline on a man sitting in a booth near him, then lit matches that he threw at the victim, according to KGW.

Officials said unreleased surveillance video shows Swanger running out of the restaurant after a large flash near the victim, who was later identified as 69-year-old Scott Ranstrom. Authorities say Swanger and Ranstrom did not know each other.

The victim was taken to a nearby hospital where he is being treated for critical injuries, according to his sister, Leslie Kurtz.

“I went to see him and I thought, ‘It wouldn’t be that bad, could it?’ No, it’s worse,” she told KOIN TV. “He’s in critical condition… it’s horrible. Whoever did this is horrible.”

A GoFundMe account has been set up to help pay for Ranstrom’s medical bills.

Denny’s released this statement about the incident:

“We are deeply disturbed by the senseless, random act of violence that took place at our franchised-owned Happy Valley restaurant, and our thoughts and prayers are with our guest that was seriously injured.”

Sheriff’s Office spokesman Brian Jensen told The Oregonian that the attack appears to have been random and not a hate crime.

However, detectives are investigating whether there is a connection between the Denny’s attack and a similar one that happened Sunday night at a local movie theater during a showing of “The Fate of the Furious.”  

Swanger was arrested Thursday night at a transitional home a few blocks away from the restaurant, according to KGW.

A neighbor who used to live at the home with Swanger saw surveillance video of the suspect in the Denny’s parking lot and believed it was his former roommate. He then called in a tip to the sheriff’s office.

The neighbor also told KGW he was surprised by the allegations.

“He was really quiet…he stayed to himself,” he said.

Swanger is currently in the Clackamas County Jail without bail. His previous criminal history includes charges of robbery, burglary and assault.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Indiana University is taking a big step toward combat sexual assault and violence against women on its campus.

On Wednesday, the university released a new policy banning any prospective student who has a history of sexual assault or domestic violence from joining any of the school’s athletic programs.

The policy bars the acceptance of any transfer student or incoming freshman “who has been convicted of or pled guilty or no contest to a felony involving sexual violence…, or has been found responsible for sexual violence by a formal institutional disciplinary action at any previous collegiate or secondary school.”

“Sexual violence” under this provision is defined as “dating violence, domestic violence, rape, sexual assault, or sexual violence as defined by the Indiana University Policy on Sexual Misconduct.”

Indiana University Athletic Director Fred Glass told IndyStar that the policy was inspired by a similar ban created by the Southeastern Conference in 2015, which includes 14 colleges. The SEC policy bans any school in the conference to accept a transfer athlete with a history of “serious misconduct” ― an umbrella term that includes domestic violence, sexual assault or “other forms of sexual violence.”

“It’s something the SEC, with their transfer ban, I think raised the issue generally,” Glass told IndyStar. “We’ve been working on that since that time, in trying to put something together that makes sense for Indiana University.”

Indiana University is part of the Big Ten, which includes 13 other schools such as University of Michigan, Rutgers University and Penn State University. 

“My hope is that [Indiana is] leading in this area, and maybe others will follow with, maybe not the exact same policy, but one that fits their particular institutions,” Glass added. 

Dan Schorr, the co-leader of sexual misconduct and Title IX investigations practices at Kroll, told The Huffington Post this policy is definitely a step in the right direction when it comes to keeping students safe from perpetrators. 

“If there’s someone who’s a known public safety threat based on a prior conviction or finding of sexual misconduct, it’s understandable why a school would not want that person to come to their school,” Schorr said. “It’s a rational response, and I think it’s likely that you’ll see other schools follow it.” 

The one issue Schorr was quick to point out, however, is that campus disciplinary proceedings are often led by people without expertise in handling cases of sexual misconduct, and tend to have a bias toward the university. 

“It’s certainly something to consider as people look at how ‘campus courts’ are developed because they’re not always conducted by professional investigators and there’s concerns about how well those procedures are carried out,” said Schorr. 

Indiana’s new policy states that the athletics program is required to do its “due diligence” by running a background check and an internet search on all prospective athletes. Prospective athletes will also be asked about “any previous or potential arrests, convictions, protective orders, probations, suspensions, expulsions, or other discipline involving sexual violence or any other matter.”

But if the people conducting these aforementioned investigations aren’t experts in the sexual misconduct field, Schorr explained, the policy becomes less useful. 

“It’s important that whoever’s handling these types of cases has specialized experience in investigating sexual misconduct cases, because they are different than other types of investigations,” Schorr said. “You want someone who’s a trained investigator to really get to the bottom of a prior allegation, rather than someone who doesn’t have investigative experience just asking questions; they might not know what questions to ask.”

type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related… + articlesList=574ee150e4b02912b2414287,58f8b212e4b0cb086d7e766f,58e24c14e4b0c777f788d24f,58f11e55e4b0bb9638e3c337

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Voting irregularities in North Carolina accounted for just 0.01 percent of nearly 4.8 million votes in last year’s general election, according to a State Board Of Elections audit released on Friday.

The State Board Of Elections said that even if every irregularity was proven to be voter fraud, there wasn’t enough of it to have influenced the outcome of any race.

“One ineligible vote is too many in any election; however, our analysis of irregularities does not indicate any contest was affected in November,” Kim Westbrook Strach, executive director of the State Board of Elections, said in a statement. 

The audit comes as the Supreme Court is considering whether to hear North Carolina’s appeal from a lower court ruling blocking its controversial 2013 photo voter ID law, which lawmakers argued was needed to prevent voter fraud. The audit also is a slap to former Gov. Pat McCrory (R), who claimed there was voter fraud in the November election and refused to concede his defeat.

Officials in other states, including Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada, have been able to offer only scant examples of voter fraud. President Donald Trump, who won North Carolina in last year’s presidential election, has alleged that millions of illegal votes were cast for his opponent Hillary Clinton in the U.S. election. Trump has offered no evidence for the claim.

North Carolina’s audit describes few instances of outright fraud.

“The evidence suggests that participation by ineligible voters is neither rampant nor non-existent in North Carolina,” the audit report said. “Our audits suggest that in the 2016 general election, approximately 0.01% of ballots were cast by ineligible voters. Most incidents are isolated and uncoordinated, and detecting technical violations does not always prove purposefully unlawful conduct. Our work indicates that ineligible voters are not isolated to one political party or any geographical region of the state.”

The audit found there were 441 investigations into suspected felons voting, 41 cases of non-citizens voting, and 24 substantiated cases of double voting. The audit found just two cases of voter impersonation ― the kind of fraud a photo ID voting requirement aims to prevent.

North Carolina in 2013 passed a law that requires voters to show photo ID at the polls, shortened the early voting period, and eliminated same-day voter registration.

Critics argued the law is unnecessary because illegal voting is rare and the the law made it disproportionately more difficult for African Americans, poor and elderly residents to vote. A federal appeals court last year blocked the state from implementing the law, ruling that it targeted African Americans with “almost surgical precision.”

The audit provides a glimpse into why people vote illegally. Often, the motive is confusion about the law. In the 41 cases of non-citizens voting, for example, the Board of Elections found that all of the individuals were in the United States legally and didn’t know they were prohibited from voting. Some had been misinformed by canvassers. One woman who had registered to vote had lived in the United States for 50 years and thought she had citizenship because she had been married to a U.S. citizen.

The two cases of voter impersonation involved one woman who forged her husband’s signature on a mail-in ballot, and another who voted in person on behalf of her deceased mother. The audit found the “suspects in each case indicated that they were motivated out of a desire to carry out their loved one’s voting wishes.” The Board of Elections said it is reviewing an additional 19 cases of potential voter impersonation, but some of those cases appeared to be cases of mistaken identity.

The report also shows how easily someone can mistakenly be accused of illegally voting. The board found during its probe of voting by non-citizens that “even where data from the Division of Motor Vehicles, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the voter rolls matched exactly, a high proportion of flagged individuals were citizens.” Some felons suspected of illegally voting presented information to auditors showing they were actually eligible.

Earlier this week, Democracy North Carolina, a voting rights group, called for a criminal investigation of McCrory’s campaign and the Republican Party of North Carolina, saying both groups brought frivolous challenges to legitimate votes. The group also released a report detailing the humiliation of legitimate voters who were nonetheless accused of fraud.

The state GOP chairman said the party was “dismayed but not surprised” by the audit.

“This report confirms instances of illegal voting by convicted felons, illegal immigrants, and people voting under other names, including dead voters,” party chair Robin Hayes said in statement that ignored the fact that the audit found a miniscule number of irregularities. “These people should be investigated and criminally prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.